[Quenty]

This article presents an accurate picture of how things work at a high conceptual level. It glosses over certain details, because git is very complex. For example, git has, if I recall correctly, 4 staging areas, of which represent different sources when it comes to a merge conflict. However, this detail can mostly be ignored because it’s not relevant to the high level conceptual ideas this article is trying to present.

I would argue most things in technology are complex, and mental models are intentional ways to take something complex and turn it into something more simple. This article does not create meaningless metaphors.

[rendall]

> However, this detail can mostly be ignored because it’s not relevant to the high level conceptual ideas this article is trying to present.

Personally speaking, I find knowing and distinguishing among the 4 indexes to be essential to understanding git. Not including and really exploring that detail gives people an incorrect mental model of what's happening.

Marvelous, if the metaphors of the article helped you, but I empathize with the upstream poster's frustration. I believe that the content of the article is not medicine for the malaise it describes.

[recursive]

The official documentation for `git add` refers to "the index". I'm not seeing any reference to multiple indexes. I've been using git for years, and I've never heard of it. I read a book about it. But parts of it are definitely still mysterious to me. Anyway, where can I find any evidence of these 4 indexes?