5 ms·

> It's stupidly simple at the end of the day That reminds me a joke. On a particularly convoluted math lecture the professor writes on the whiteboard and expla

by avmich 10y ago

> It's stupidly simple at the end of the day That reminds me a joke. On a particularly convoluted math lecture the professor writes on the whiteboard and explains at the same time: "from here we can state that, obviously..." He suddenly stops, slowly turns the head down, keeps mumbling "so we can obviously...". He slowly walks in the room, trying to catch the thought, then leaves the room... Some minutes pass. Then he comes back, with head up, widely open eyes and confidently continues - "Yes, this is completely obvious - so from here we can easily get the following conclusion." Git has a lot of nice explanations. However it's either a particularly edgy case, or all those great explanations somehow fail to easily conduct those core "stupidly simple" ideas forward to actual Git beginners. At least to some of those beginners - not an insignificant number.

notheguyouthink 10y ago
I mean, i just find any defense of Git's "simplicity" hilariously unobservant. I'm sure to many Git is perfectly simplistic in design and UX. It is clear, and well thought out. But, for many others, Git is a confusing mess. And, i should think, nearly everyone has heard someone(s) call Git confusing. I don't think it is up for debate that Git is known for being confusing. Who cares if it "is" confusing or not - that's relative. Most things aren't confusing if you've learned the subject matter.. right? It is known for being confusing though, and that is clearly to people who don't know Git. Ffs, there wouldn't be debates about Git's UX every month on HN if it was so utterly non-confusing, haha. Some things are very simple and easy to learn, use, and adopt. Git is not one of them, clearly and objectively.
- oxymoron 10y ago
  One thing often missing from the debate is this: version control is a fundamentally complex problem. In my view, it's a unfair to blame this complexity on the tools. The cockpit of an airplane is famously complex not because Boeing and Airbus wanted it that way but because flying a plane is complex, and because they couldn't make it any simpler. Git has a fundamentally sound architecture, and with a correct mental model of what's going on you'll be able to deal with pretty much any situation. Nevertheless, you won't get beyond the simple use cases if your conceptual picture is incorrect, but that'll be the case for any VCS. I don't believe that git is necessarily superior to mercurial or take-your-pick, but let's not disregard that we're dealing with something difficult.
  - hyperpape 10y ago
    Version control is complicated, but git adds a whole nother layer of bullshit on top of it. Why do you use checkout to change a branch, create a branch and revert a file? Not because version control is hard, but because as a CLI, git does many things wrong (example from http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/).
    - cyphar 10y ago
      > Why do you use checkout to change a branch, create a branch and revert a file git checkout lets you check out files from a particular point in time. If you don't specify a path, it will check out every file. If you don't specify a point in time, it defaults to HEAD (like every git command). I fail to see what is confusing about that. You're not "reverting" changes to a file, you're just checking out a version of the file from the history. `git checkout -b` is shorthand, and is shorthand that I personally don't use.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    > One thing often missing from the debate is this: version control is a fundamentally complex problem. No, it's not! I've been teaching SVN to Electronics Engineers, Designers and other folks who have never used version control before. It's always been very straightforward. They'd be able to use it effectively after a quick tutorial and demo, with a few notes of advice. I've been teaching Git recently... until I gave up. It's a giant WTF clusterfuck. Git is the ultimate failure in simplicity and user experience. Just use SVN (it works on git repo).
    - cyphar 10y ago
      > No, it's not! Yes it is. SVN is so "simple" because it doesn't have many of the features needed by large teams working on code. It's simply not fit for purpose. > Just use SVN (it works on git repo). Unless you need branches (and merge them), code that doesn't get silently corrupted, a proper history of all changes, the ability to work offline without connecting to a server. Y'know, the problems that git was built to solve.
- jefurii 10y ago
  Git is not "simple" from the point of view of new users. But it is "simple" from the point of view of the programmers of Git. There's the graph structure and some tools to manipulate it. It doesn't do much to hide that. The underlying code of the application I'm writing would be much "simpler" if I didn't have to add all kinds of features to make it easier for the user. Also, Git is not so much a VCS application as a framework for version control.
skarap 10y ago
> "from here we can state that, obviously..." He suddenly stops, slowly turns the head down, keeps mumbling "so we can obviously...". He slowly walks in the room, trying to catch the thought, then leaves the room... Some minutes pass. Then he comes back, with head up, widely open eyes and confidently continues - "Yes, this is completely obvious - so from here we can easily get the following conclusion." I had a lecturer who did this! With the only difference being he didn't leave the room, he would just stand there speechless with a poker face and then - 0.5-1 minute later - he'd say "well, this is obvious". SUDDENLY, during the exams he expected us to explain the obvious.
buzzybee 10y ago
There is a good complementary story to this, of the math professor who is asked how to solve a math problem by a student. The professor pauses, then says the answer. The student asks again, "But how do you solve it?" The professor pauses again, says the answer again. When the student protests, the professor says, "I already solved it two different ways! What more do you want?"

by avmich 10y ago

notheguyouthink 10y ago

I mean, i just find any defense of Git's "simplicity" hilariously unobservant. I'm sure to many Git is perfectly simplistic in design and UX. It is clear, and well thought out. But, for many others, Git is a confusing mess. And, i should think, nearly everyone has heard someone(s) call Git confusing. I don't think it is up for debate that Git is known for being confusing. Who cares if it "is" confusing or not - that's relative. Most things aren't confusing if you've learned the subject matter.. right? It is known for being confusing though, and that is clearly to people who don't know Git. Ffs, there wouldn't be debates about Git's UX every month on HN if it was so utterly non-confusing, haha. Some things are very simple and easy to learn, use, and adopt. Git is not one of them, clearly and objectively.

oxymoron 10y ago
One thing often missing from the debate is this: version control is a fundamentally complex problem. In my view, it's a unfair to blame this complexity on the tools. The cockpit of an airplane is famously complex not because Boeing and Airbus wanted it that way but because flying a plane is complex, and because they couldn't make it any simpler. Git has a fundamentally sound architecture, and with a correct mental model of what's going on you'll be able to deal with pretty much any situation. Nevertheless, you won't get beyond the simple use cases if your conceptual picture is incorrect, but that'll be the case for any VCS. I don't believe that git is necessarily superior to mercurial or take-your-pick, but let's not disregard that we're dealing with something difficult.
- hyperpape 10y ago
  Version control is complicated, but git adds a whole nother layer of bullshit on top of it. Why do you use checkout to change a branch, create a branch and revert a file? Not because version control is hard, but because as a CLI, git does many things wrong (example from http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/).
  - cyphar 10y ago
    > Why do you use checkout to change a branch, create a branch and revert a file git checkout lets you check out files from a particular point in time. If you don't specify a path, it will check out every file. If you don't specify a point in time, it defaults to HEAD (like every git command). I fail to see what is confusing about that. You're not "reverting" changes to a file, you're just checking out a version of the file from the history. `git checkout -b` is shorthand, and is shorthand that I personally don't use.
- user5994461 10y ago
  > One thing often missing from the debate is this: version control is a fundamentally complex problem. No, it's not! I've been teaching SVN to Electronics Engineers, Designers and other folks who have never used version control before. It's always been very straightforward. They'd be able to use it effectively after a quick tutorial and demo, with a few notes of advice. I've been teaching Git recently... until I gave up. It's a giant WTF clusterfuck. Git is the ultimate failure in simplicity and user experience. Just use SVN (it works on git repo).
  - cyphar 10y ago
    > No, it's not! Yes it is. SVN is so "simple" because it doesn't have many of the features needed by large teams working on code. It's simply not fit for purpose. > Just use SVN (it works on git repo). Unless you need branches (and merge them), code that doesn't get silently corrupted, a proper history of all changes, the ability to work offline without connecting to a server. Y'know, the problems that git was built to solve.
jefurii 10y ago
Git is not "simple" from the point of view of new users. But it is "simple" from the point of view of the programmers of Git. There's the graph structure and some tools to manipulate it. It doesn't do much to hide that. The underlying code of the application I'm writing would be much "simpler" if I didn't have to add all kinds of features to make it easier for the user. Also, Git is not so much a VCS application as a framework for version control.

skarap 10y ago

> "from here we can state that, obviously..." He suddenly stops, slowly turns the head down, keeps mumbling "so we can obviously...". He slowly walks in the room, trying to catch the thought, then leaves the room... Some minutes pass. Then he comes back, with head up, widely open eyes and confidently continues - "Yes, this is completely obvious - so from here we can easily get the following conclusion." I had a lecturer who did this! With the only difference being he didn't leave the room, he would just stand there speechless with a poker face and then - 0.5-1 minute later - he'd say "well, this is obvious". SUDDENLY, during the exams he expected us to explain the obvious.

buzzybee 10y ago

There is a good complementary story to this, of the math professor who is asked how to solve a math problem by a student. The professor pauses, then says the answer. The student asks again, "But how do you solve it?" The professor pauses again, says the answer again. When the student protests, the professor says, "I already solved it two different ways! What more do you want?"