Re: Questions about git-rev-parse

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Feb 28, 2007, 16:00 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702280751000.12485@woody.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <200702280854.32440.andyparkins@gmail.com>

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Andy Parkins wrote:

> 
> Funny; I'd always guessed that it came from Lord of the Rings, which (I think) 
> often mentioned "Ent-ish" as being the language of the trees.

Yeah, we for a while had that overly geekish thing, but we didn't use "entish", we used just "ent". Because an "ent" is "tree-ish".

So when we used "ent", we didn't have the "-ish" there at all, and at some point all the ents got search-and-replaced into "tree-ish".

But "treeish" actually came before, and the "ent" thing was just a temporary pun that got dropped.

Looking at the git log, the first time we use "tree-ish" is fairly early: apparently May 5, 2005. Commit ac4e0869 introduces it instead of <tree/commit> (probably because the tag part got added, and to explain that we only care about the resulting tree and won't actually *use* any of the commit/tag information except to get to it).

			Linus