There still are a handful of "pack-file" remaining in the documentation set, even after applying these three that changes 6 instances of 'pack-file' to 'packfile'. git-index-pack.txt:'git index-pack' [-v] [-o <index-file>] <pack-file> git-index-pack.txt: [<pack-file>] git-index-pack.txt: instead and a copy is then written to <pack-file>. If git-index-pack.txt: <pack-file> is not specified, the pack is written to git-index-pack.txt: <pack-file> is not specified consider using --keep to git-unpack-objects.txt:'git unpack-objects' [-n] [-q] [-r] [--strict] < <pack-file> technical/pack-heuristics.txt: <linus> Anyway, the pack-file could easily be denser still, but technical/pack-heuristics.txt: <linus> In particular, while the pack-file is then compressed, technical/pack-heuristics.txt: <linus> Anyway: I'm not even trying to claim that the pack-files technical/pack-protocol.txt: update-request = *shallow ( command-list | push-cert ) [pack-file] technical/pack-protocol.txt: pack-file = "PACK" 28*(OCTET) user-manual.txt:[[pack-files]] A quick "git grep packfile" vs "git grep pack-file" inside Documentation/ directory indicates that we seem to use 'packfile' primarily in the lower-level technical documents that are not end-user facing. Almost half of them are in the release notes that we won't bother "fixing", so it might make sense to go the other way around, consistently using "pack-file" that may be more familiar to end-users. What do others think? -- 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