Thomas Ackermann <> 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.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to