3 ms·
the fact that you use the word "checkins" strongly implies that this has never happened to you.
by Hello71 9y ago
the fact that you use the word "checkins" strongly implies that this has never happened to you.
- taneq 9y agoOr that I used the generic term rather than the git-specific term?
- fyi1183 9y agoI don't know if you're intentionally trolling, but I have been using version control for almost 20 years now and have never used the term check-in. All version control software that I've used in that time used the term commit.
- pseudalopex 9y agoPerforce, TFS, Subversion, and Mercurial all use or recognize "check in" at least as a verb, and "changeset" at least used to be common as a noun.
- fyi1183 9y agoI'm well aware of that, but the ggp was arguing that "check in" is a generic term and "commit" isn't. That's pretty obviously nonsense.
- taneq 9y agoUh, where? I said "check in" is a generic term (which it is - it's listed as the first synonym for 'commit' here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_control#Common_vocabulary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_control#Common_vocabul... ). I never mentioned the term "commit" (which is obviously also a common term for the same action). Then you suggested I was trolling, for saying it was a generic term, which it is. Now you're putting words in my mouth and calling them nonsense. Please stop.
- fyi1183 9y agoHere's what you wrote: > Or that I used the generic term rather than the git-specific term? In the context of the discussion, generic term refers to "check in", and git-specific term refers to "commit" (which is the only possible alternative term to be using in that context). The obvious reading is that you're calling "commit" a git-specific term. So I wouldn't say I'm putting words into your mouth, unless you were unaware that "commit" is the correct alternative term, which is of course a possibility that I didn't consider.