Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Why isn't "porcelain" a popular term?

Post

Why isn't "porcelain" a popular term? [closed]

+1
−4

Closed as off topic by Quasímodo‭ on May 4, 2025 at 10:04

This question is not within the scope of Linux Systems.

This question was closed; new answers can no longer be added. Users with the Vote on Holds ability may vote to reopen this question if it has been improved or closed incorrectly.

From What does the term "porcelain" mean in Git?:

"Porcelain" is the material from which toilets are usually made (and sometimes other fixtures such as washbasins). This is distinct from "plumbing" (the actual pipes and drains), where the porcelain provides a more user-friendly interface to the plumbing.

Git uses this terminology in analogy, to separate the low-level commands that users don't usually need to use directly (the "plumbing") from the more user-friendly high level commands (the "porcelain").

As "plumbing" is a well-known term in Unix, I wonder why "porcelain" isn't popularized as well?

History

1 comment thread

Not common + not useful (2 comments)
Show more
Not common + not useful
matthewsnyder‭ wrote 12 months ago · edited 12 months ago

Not many programs are as complex as git so as to require this distinction.

When there is a need to distinguish, low level and high level are much better. They don't require a whole section in the manual explaining what they mean, and are about the same length.

I actually don't know if I've seen anyone use it outside git. It seems to have been a terminology git tried to coin, and failed.

VLAZ‭ wrote 9 months ago

I agree with matthewsnyder‭ - ultimately, the term isn't popular because it didn't become popular. It's circular definition, sure, but there is nothing else here. Things are popular because they became popular. And aren't if they haven't become popular.

It's hard to see what other answer is expected here.