On 05/13, Philip Oakley wrote: > From: "Thomas Gummerer" <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 6:25 PM > >I have been drafting the Version 5 of the index format over the past > >few days with the help of Thomas Rast, Michael Haggerty, cmn and > >barrbrain on IRC. > > > > >GIT index format > >================ > > > >= The git index file has the following format > > > > Given the discussions on the list about the general naming of > Staging vs Index [1], would a careful change to the title, and the > adding of an introductory line help in putting the index file format > in the appropriate (implementation) context? > > I'm thinking that perhaps - > Title: "GIT index file format (V5)", i.e. add the 'file' qualifier. > > Introduction line: > "The git index file (.git/index) documents the status of the files in the git staging area." > i.e. this is an implementation document for this particular file, but using the terms > suggested in [1]. Followed by > "The staging area is used for preparing commits, merging, etc.". > i.e. show the purpose of this index relative to the overall > 'staging area'. IIRC the use of the staging area for merging was > one of Linus's key features;-) > > By crafting the title and the introduction line(s) the confusion > e.g. [2], between implementation details (this document) and > conceptual operation can be clearly separated. > > Philip > > [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/197111 > [1.8.0] use 'stage' term consistently > > [2] http://raflabs.com/blogs/silence-is-foo/2011/04/07/staging-area-index-cache-git/ > ... Git it's a little bit confusing to undersand some of its terminology Thanks for your suggestion. I've changed the documentation to take this into account. -- 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