Re: [PATCH 0/2] use "working trees" instead of "worktree" in our API

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 20, 2017, 19:37 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqy3vzvixm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170320192225.18928-1-sbeller@google.com>

Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:

>> For what it's worth, this conversation makes me think it was a mistake
>> to call this construct a worktree.
>
> So the way forward is to purge the use of "worktree" meaning actual working trees?

GIT_WORK_TREE environment would have be a victim of this clean-up, so is setup_work_tree(), together with numerous in-code comment about "work tree".

While I would say that we would certainly pick one and stick to it if we were inventing Git from scratch today and just started caring the distinction between core.bare and not, I am not sure how far we would want to go, and what's the expected payoff of doing this clean-up would be, given that we are starting from today's world.

So, I dunno. If the response and list concensus to Jonathan's earlier comment came up with a better name for the newer "worktree" concept, we may not have to even worry about this and instead can just declare "these are used interchangeably".