onsdag 18 april 2007 12:33 skrev Julian Phillips: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Sam Vilain wrote: > > > Julian Phillips wrote: > >>> Sure... and from my own perspective as a user, I didn't even realise > >>> what float did until now, and was surprised that "bury" would mean that. > >>> The metaphor is a stack, not a pool or a sandpit. I don't think those > >>> terms really assist in understanding, however cute they are. > >>> > >> > >> I find that bury is more natural than float (thinking of a stack of > >> documents on a desk ...). But then I don't use stg ... > >> > > > > You demonstrate my point :) by apparently missing that "bury" and > > "float" are supposed to be the *opposite* of each other. > > I didn't mean to give that impression. I was aware that they were > opposites, but was only commenting on my view of the intuitivness of each. > > I can't really think of a single metaphor where float and bury are both > appropriate though. The stack is transparent, so the "float" comes from thinking of the stack as a column (glass pillar) of water with things in it. So I wanted to float patches. I didn't think too much about the name, it just popped out. At least that is what I *think* I was thinking at the time. The logical opposide thing is to "sink" things you don't work to work on. "bury" implies you don't see things, which just isn't true. I did consider raise, but then you can raise things only a little. Floating a patch makes it move all the way to the top. -- robin - 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