3 ms·
git is popular because git is popular (and also because of the DVCS model). I'm pretty sure that it didn't win because of UX but because of network effects (htt
by ern 10y ago
git is popular because git is popular (and also because of the DVCS model). I'm pretty sure that it didn't win because of UX but because of network effects (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect). There are plenty of irrational decisions made by developers based on "geek cred" and status signaling.
Regardless of the reason for its success, git has a huge installed base and plenty of online help to find one's way out of a corner. Having git skills is also a big plus for employability. I have migrated teams onto git rather than Mercurial solely for these reasons. UX was a secondary consideration.
- js8 10y agoSo do you think Linus made a mistake writing Git and should have gone with Mercurial instead? I mean, the argument by popularity can apply to CVS and SVN too, which were at times more popular than Git.. I don't find it a very convincing explanation. Popularity could have been the reason why people chose Git over Mercurial specifically (if you're talking about DVCSs), but this kinda makes what Linus did a bad choice. What I am saying is if people chose inferior product (with worse UX) due to popularity or network effects, then this was a mistake, and you should be able to point out what exactly the mistake is.
- ufo 10y agoIIRC git and mercurial were being developed around the same time at each other. And lots of git's design has to do with Linux-kernel workflows, which are quite peculiar.