3 ms·
Every source control system has had a terrible UI. I mean, most of them don't even really make an attempt. (Unless you count things like Time Machine or Microso
by blakeyrat 10y ago
Every source control system has had a terrible UI. I mean, most of them don't even really make an attempt. (Unless you count things like Time Machine or Microsoft Word's revision tracking, those are both acceptably decent.)
But Git is a whole 'nother layer of awful beyond all of them.
Another one of the "reasons I can't get along with Linux users" is that they see something like Git and just kind of shrug and deal with it instead of getting angry that we have a piece of basically brand new software that was built without even attempting to incorporate any UI concepts we knew about at the time it was written. And since it's a CLI that about a thousand other scripts and tools consume (instead of having proper separation of the human interface from the machine interface), it basically cannot be improved at this point, not without breaking thousands of third-party tools. Sigh.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoThat's pretty much true of the entire baroque edifice of unix-based CLI tools. They are what they are, and they can't really change much. Its an increasing hill to climb to become proficient, and those already comfortable have no incentive to change it.
- blakeyrat 10y agoWhich is awful, because there's nothing stopping usability development in CLI environments (look at Cortana or Siri, for example, or to a lesser extent PowerShell) except that awful stagnation. People shouldn't have to bend their brain to work with a machine. The machine should be designed to work with human brains. And to be that snarky person for a second: I've heard a lot of people who actually love Linux CLIs still complaining about Git's weird-ass behaviors. https://stevebennett.me/2012/02/24/10-things-i-hate-about-git/ https://stevebennett.me/2012/02/24/10-things-i-hate-about-gi...