[kbknapp]

Git terminology is a clinical example where many (most? definitely not all) terms make perfect sense once you already understand how it works, but make almost no sense in concert with other terminology or when you don't know the implementation details.

Leaky terminology.

[jordigh]

In part, but also, it's because different people worked on different parts of git and came up with different names. Linus originally called it the cache, the most computer sciency term, and then I think Junio renamed it to index, a more DVCS-specific term, but most users called it the staging area, and now the evolution of this term is fossilised into the git UI as well as its internals.

[nickm12]

No, it's not sensible, just sloppy naming plain and simple. Good naming takes effort and it just wasn't done by git's early developers.

[tester756]

So basically poor API design

Imagine if you had to know OS/IDE/compiler internals for basic usage

[PaulDavisThe1st]

> Imagine if you had to know OS/IDE/compiler internals for basic usage

Back when I used to walk backwards uphill for 6 days to get to school, that's precisely how it was.

Except that "IDE" was a misspelling of "I'd" and nobody ever did that.

[tester756]

hmm?