On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 07:11:40PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > >> > Let's start a reformation of the git terminology to use analogies that >> > have been around since the dawn of computing: 'memory', 'address', and >> > 'pointer'. >> >> I actually think calling them "sha1s" is better, simply because this bit >> of jargon doesn't mean anything else (git deals with email, so "address" >> is overloaded). And the term is already in use for this particular case, >> and it doesn't mean anything else at all (since, of course, the crypto >> thing is "SHA-1", not "sha1"), and it's short (which is important for >> making it easy to look at usage help). > > Junio suggested "object name" in another thread, which I think is nicely > descriptive. It's not a name, it's an identification, so how about "id"? You have tree ids, commit ids, blob ids, and so on. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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