Thomas Ackermann <th.ac...@arcor.de> writes: >> If I were to decide today to change the spellings, with an explicit >> purpose of making things more consistent across documentation, it >> may make sense to use even a simpler rule that is less error-prone >> for people who write new sentences that has to have the word. How >> about treating it just like any other ordinary word? That is, we >> say "git" (without double-quotes, of course), unless it comes at the >> beginning of a sentence? >> > > The widely used books on Git by Scott Chacon or Jon Loeliger (and > many others) are using 'Git' instead of 'git' when talking about the > whole system. So IMHO it would not be wise to change our internal > documentation from using 'GIT'/'Git' to using 'git'. The internal > documentation should be a natural continuation of these books > by content and style.
That argument is going the other way around (we _are_ the authoritative source). But I am OK with "Git" as a proper noun (which always begins with capital letter), using "git" only when it is something the user would type. Just come up with a simple-to-explain rule so that people will have no doubt which one to use in their new text and stick to it. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html