Re: [PATCH 2/3] git add --intent-to-add: fix removal of cached emptiness

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

 



On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 04:38:12PM +0100, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 04:55, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This uses the extended index flag mechanism introduced earlier to mark
> > the entries added to the index via "git add -N" with CE_INTENT_TO_ADD.
> 
> Is 'intent' [0] used properly here? Should it not be 'intend' [1]?
> 
> [0] http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intent
> [1] http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intend

I think it's fine. The flags describe the entry, not the user (e.g.,
CE_VALID). So the entry does not _intend_ to add anything, but rather
there exists _intent_ to add this entry (you might also say the entry is
"_intended_ to be added", but that is getting a bit clunky).

-Peff
--
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]

  Powered by Linux