> >> In the context of "status", it probably is more logically correct if > >> it said "No commit yet" or something. This is no longer "is initial > >> harder than root?" ;-) > > > > Exactly. I agree with OP, in the context of running 'git status', I find > > the string "Initial commit" confusing in the example below, because > > at that time no commits exist. This creates confusion what git is > > talking about. The 'git log' message is not very friendly either. > > > > Perhaps say something like "Repository is empty." there. > > <bikeshed> > I like that. I think that is a very appropriately descriptive statement. > > An alternative ,with slightly less textual change, could be "Waiting for > initial commit" > </bikeshed> We should consider orphan/unborn branches, too: git (master)$ git checkout --orphan newroot Switched to a new branch 'newroot' git (newroot +)$ git reset --hard git (newroot #)$ git status On branch newroot Initial commit nothing to commit (create/copy files and use "git add" to track) A purely textual change will not be sufficient, I'm afraid. Saying "Repository is empty" right after 'git init' is fine, I like it. However, on an unborn branch with empty index it would be just wrong. "Waiting for initial commit" is much better even in this case, but I still don't like that "initial", though I can't say why, and don't have any better suggestion either. Though users experienced enough to create an empty unborn branch would probably not be confused by that.