I love the term "software archaeology" because it implies the existence of subfields such as "software experimental archaeology" (attempting to reconstruct and demonstrate how people once built software) and "software paleoethnobotany" (quantifying what botanicals were culturally significant to software and the broader historic implications to the societies that wrote it), but also the existence of the broader field "software anthropology" and its offshoot "software sociology", and
@aeva In my current project, I often use the term Git Archaeology. Which I think applies here.
- "git experimental archaeology" What problem was this commit intended to solve?
- "git anthropology" What was the culture and pressures that created these design decisions?
- "git paleoethnobotany" WTF WERE THEY ON!?