| ▲ | foresto 2 hours ago | |||||||
> It's probably just something no one has thought of doing. One might reasonably think that about a number of git's rough edges, and one might be surprised at the reality. Some years ago, the annoyance of git's inconsistent terminology drove me to look into consolidating "cache", "index", and "staging area" in git's help text and documentation. What I found was that others had (of course) thought of it before, but when they tried to do it, it was rejected by git's gatekeepers. | ||||||||
| ▲ | throw_await 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
That makes me sad. This termainology is really one of the major flaws of git, along with the checkout/reset thing | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | Melatonic an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Are those three really all the same things? That seems crazy to have all three not consolidated. | ||||||||
| ▲ | js2 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
I understand there's friction in contributing to git, but it's absolutely possible to improve the docs: Contributions from jvns: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Agit%2Fgit+jvns&type=commi... Here she explains how she did it: https://jvns.ca/blog/2026/01/08/a-data-model-for-git/ Contributions I've made: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Agit%2Fgit+jaysoffian+docu... Generically: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Agit%2Fgit+documentation&t... Do you have a link to your proposal on the git mailing list? | ||||||||