Re: [PATCH 00/11] More consistant terminology ("remote-tracking branch", "not updated")
- From
Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
- Date
- Oct 25, 2010, 17:30 UTC
- Message-ID
- <vpqsjzu5gf3.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
- In-Reply-To
- <20101023191104.GM21040@burratino>
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Jakub Narebski wrote: >> Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> writes: > >>> this is an attempt to be more consistant in the terminology used in Git. >> >> Thank you very much for your work! > > Yes, seconded!
Actually, I did the easy part ;-) (easy grep-able patterns, and uncontroversal solution).
There's still a mess about the "upstream/downstream" Vs "remote-tracking" terminology, both in the UI (--track options here and there) and the doc.
And I'd really like the "index/cache/stage" thing to be fixed too. I like "stage/staging area" best, but it seems this part does not make a consensus (yet?).
I'm just hoping I gave the right example and someone else will now take care of these two ;-).
-- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/