4 ms·
I don't think those commands are remotely sufficient to work with git. You're forgetting about merging, traversing history, branch creation, remotes, grokking t
by weberc2 10y ago
I don't think those commands are remotely sufficient to work with git. You're forgetting about merging, traversing history, branch creation, remotes, grokking the staging area, etc. I'm sure I'm missing a lot as well, because those of us who have worked with git for a long time take these things for granted. And it does frustrate me that it's so complex, because Mercurial shows us it doesn't have to be this way. Unfortunately, Mercurial never took off (presumably because it never had a good GitHub analog).
- StavrosK 10y agoHow are they forgetting merging, remotes, etc? The commands are literally on the front page. The only thing it doesn't have is a staging area, which is a conscious decision that I happen to agree with.
- k__ 10y agoThe commands are enough to get through the first month of using git for your own project. They are certainly not enough to work with Git for your whole career :)
- weberc2 10y agoThe examples I mentioned were taken from notes I made myself when I was learning git (whenever I had an "aha" moment, I would make a note so I wouldn't forget how to work around it later, since I didn't know the git jargon and thus couldn't Google effectively). Maybe my experience is atypical, but at the time I didn't think I was doing anything novel.
- wst_ 10y agoThen they introduce more mess than it's worth. Sooner or later you will have to go back to the original ones and learn anyway.