Re: [PATCH 0/2] use "working trees" instead of "worktree" in our API

Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

For what it's worth, this conversation makes me think it was a mistake
to call this construct a worktree.

So the way forward is to purge the use of "worktree" meaning actual working trees?

GIT_WORK_TREE environment would have be a victim of this clean-up,
so is setup_work_tree(), together with numerous in-code comment
about "work tree".

While I would say that we would certainly pick one and stick to it
if we were inventing Git from scratch today and just started caring
the distinction between core.bare and not, I am not sure how far we
would want to go, and what's the expected payoff of doing this
clean-up would be, given that we are starting from today's world.

So, I dunno.  If the response and list concensus to Jonathan's
earlier comment came up with a better name for the newer "worktree"
concept, we may not have to even worry about this and instead can
just declare "these are used interchangeably".