Subject: Re: [PATCH] rename dirlink to gitlink.

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 16:32:51 -0700

"Torgil Svensson" <[email-masked]> writes:

> On 5/21/07, Martin Waitz <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Unify naming of plumbing dirlink/gitlink concept:
>>
>> perl -pi -e 's/dirlink/gitlink/g' -e 's/DIRLNK/GITLINK/g'
>> ---
>
> Does this mean that the link doesn't necessarily has to be represented
> as a directory (even though current code does it) ?

I do not think the patch has that much deep meaning.

Personally I think the patch is similar to renaming "cache" used
in the code to "index" --- needless code shuffling that does not
buy you anything.

As an internal symbol, S_IFDIRLNK makes _much_ more sense than
S_IFGITLINK, exactly because it is a mixture of S_IFDIR and
S_IFLNK.

The only excuse that we _might_ want to consider the patch is
that S_IFDIRLNK has not lived that long, compared to the use of
word "cache" in our codebase.  It's only two weeks old -- so if
we were to apply this patch, we would need to do that right
away, or it will be never.

But I am not _so_ enthused about the renaming in the code.