[darcs-users] Re: cache-name-proposal (was surely_slurp_Current)

[Thomas Zander]

On Saturday 22 January 2005 15:58, David Roundy wrote:
> So the question is, what should this object be called.  At the moment,
> _darcs/current is an "internal" darcs object, and I wouldn't mind calling
> it something else when interfacing with the user, since "current" really
> isn't very intuitive.  Certainly it's name should include "cache".
> Juliusz, as you can see above, went with "current cache".  I remember
> that arch had something called a "pristine cache", which might be a bit
> more intuitive--a copy of the tree without your dirty local changes.
>
> Anyhow, so I wanted to run the question of what best to call this by
> everyone, to see if anyone had a brilliant idea, or saw a problem with
> (i.e an easy way to misinterperet) one of the existing ideas.

the word pristine is a relatively uncommon word for non native english 
speakers (like me). I'd go for more common words like
clean-copy
original-copy
former-version
last-version

But I don't see any problem with 'current' myself...
-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20050123/693d4649/attachment.pgp