Re: [PATCH 13/16] init: allow alternate backends to be set for new repos

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/05/2016 07:03 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> I'm working on the rest now, but wanted to comment on this first.  I
>> went ahead and made this change, but I'm not sure I like it.  In the
>> git codebase, the concept will continue to be called "backend"; there
>> are already-accepted patches using that terminology.  Having two
>> separate names for the same thing seems confusing to me.
> 
> We have the option to update whatever "are already-accepted" [*1*].
> That would allow us to uniformly call it "ref storage", if we wanted
> to.

...whereas whatever we name the option, we have to live with forever
because it is user-facing. It's more important to get the option name
correct (though I agree that it would be nice for the nomenclature used
in the code to be reminiscent of the option name).

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx

--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]