Re: Consensus on "Git"

3 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: Consensus on "Git"

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:47:42

David Symonds [off-list ref] writes:
Is there consensus on "Git" being the standard capitalisation, versus
"GIT"?
I am not a consensus, but from day 1, Linus talked about "git" (all
lowercase) and "Git" was used only when it came at the beginning of a
sentence (an usual English capitalization rule) or in a section or book
title where all words (except prepositions such as "in", "on") are
capitalized, and I try to mimick it myself for consistency.

As a corollary, unless I spell all the other words in capital to SHOUT, I
never write GIT.

Re: Consensus on "Git"

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:47:42

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 01:06:44AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Is there consensus on "Git" being the standard capitalisation, versus
"GIT"?
I am not a consensus, but from day 1, Linus talked about "git" (all
lowercase) and "Git" was used only when it came at the beginning of a
sentence (an usual English capitalization rule) or in a section or book
title where all words (except prepositions such as "in", "on") are
capitalized, and I try to mimick it myself for consistency.

As a corollary, unless I spell all the other words in capital to SHOUT, I
never write GIT.
Except for the title of every set of release notes, which all start
with:

  GIT vX.Y.Z Release Notes

? :)

For a fun (ab)use of blame, you can see who wrote each of David's
suspect lines with:

   git grep -n "\bGIT\b" |
   while IFS=: read file line junk; do
     git blame -f -L $line,$line $file
   done |
   less

Many of them are variables (e.g., \b gets rid of "_", but we still have
"-", so GIT-VERSION and such are still there). Many others are the title
of the "GIT" section of the manpages. But there are some legitimate
uses, too. Many of them blame to quite a long time ago, though (e.g.,
Documentation/everyday.txt has two uses by you in 2005).

-Peff

Re: Consensus on "Git"

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:47:42

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 04:27:31AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
For a fun (ab)use of blame, you can see who wrote each of David's
suspect lines with:

   git grep -n "\bGIT\b" |
   while IFS=: read file line junk; do
     git blame -f -L $line,$line $file
   done |
   less

Many of them are variables (e.g., \b gets rid of "_", but we still have
"-", so GIT-VERSION and such are still there). Many others are the title
of the "GIT" section of the manpages. But there are some legitimate
uses, too. Many of them blame to quite a long time ago, though (e.g.,
Documentation/everyday.txt has two uses by you in 2005).
BTW, here is a much better grep (still a few false positives, but most
lines are meanginful):

   git grep -n -E "(^|[^A-Z_-])GIT($|[^A-Z_-])" |
   grep -v ':GIT$' |
   while IFS=: read file line junk; do
     git blame -f -L $line,$line $file
   done |
   less

You can really see that most of the uses of GIT are ancient. I wonder if
we should downcase the few that are in user-visible error messages. I
will let somebody else spend their time on such a conversion if they
want, though. I've already spent enough on this. :)

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help