re: I'm a Git Master, Ask Me Anything VIEW POST

FULL DISCUSSION
 

Personally I think Git offers an abysmal interface, conceived by elite engineers that wanted to do versioning their own way, but without any idea of usability. This isn't suprising from the minds that conceived Linux (including Torvalds) and its ecosystem. Just reading the documentation is a free pass to a massive headache for any novice, and this implies its discoverability is also more or less non-existent.

While some concepts and worflow methods have been a long awaited evolution of the ones found in SVN, others have a very weak connection with the main objective of the tool: versioning stuff.

I feel one of the biggest issues with Git is its monolithic nature: you can do a lot of things with Git, but some - from a more modern point of view - are better suited for external plugins. For example, git rerere is something a nice middleware could do instead.

What can you say to convince me I'm wrong?

Keep in mind that I did read your article about not using GUIs - but it's far from enough, as its main point ("Don't use wizard code you don't understand") does not imply, in my opinion, that you need to understand the underlying Git commands, but just what a GUI command means to your Git workflow. In short, you should know what's a commit, a branch, a merge and so on, but you might not care how to do it with the CLI. (I have a draft of an article about it.)

 

What can you say to convince me I'm wrong?

Nothing. Aside from your viewpoint on the creators of Git, it sounds like we're on the same page.

code of conduct - report abuse