3 ms·
Slightly off-topic rant: I want this "porcelain" terminology to die, not only is it redundant (what's wrong with "user interface"?) it's not even coherently use
by simias 6y ago
Slightly off-topic rant: I want this "porcelain" terminology to die, not only is it redundant (what's wrong with "user interface"?) it's not even coherently used within git.
So porcelain is supposed to be the opposite of the internal piping of the application, the user facing part. Fair enough. But then why does "git status" have a "--porcelain" option that's meant to generate an output for script consumption? Shouldn't that be --pipe?
And yes, I do know the history of why it's that way, but the point still stands, if you need to know arcane implementation details of some command and backward hacker logic to understand what the hell this "--porcelain" flag does, then it's a bad name.
Magit is a Git user interface inside Emacs.
- bondolo 6y agoAdd to that that the page failed to make any attempt define what was meant by porcelain.
- pmoriarty 6y agoI have to agree. I find the term "porcelain" annoying. But this may be due to me being older than a lot of people for whom the term was already established by the time they heard it, while for me it's a neologism. I feel the same about the term "user stories". Why can't they just call them features? There's some kind of urge people have to make up new names for old things that just reeks of sleazy marketing or hipsterism to me. But, whatever.. I think we both know we're not going to change anybody's mind.