On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 06:31:26PM -0500, Michael Witten wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 18:14, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Junio suggested "object name" in another thread, which I think is nicely > > descriptive. > > The reason I don't like "object name" is that "name" has connotations > that don't go well with the idea of referencing. Isn't "address" (or > "location") better in this sense? I'm not sure I agree, but if you are concerned with "name", then I think something like "object id" or "object identifier" would probably be better. "address" and "location" imply to me that they are part of a contiguous set. And while technically they may be considered addresses of a sparse 2^160 array, I'm not sure that explanation is really helping new users understand what is going on. What the user really cares about is that it is persistent and unambiguous. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html