4 ms·

"it's complicated": yes,it is. it's a product designed and built for people who deal with complex systems and information models on a daily basis; they're the e

"it's complicated": yes,it is. it's a product designed and built for people who deal with complex systems and information models on a daily basis; they're the equivalent of a professional pilot... not your feeble, senile grandmother. You wouldn't buy your feeble senile grandmother a 787, chuck her in with no training and simple expect her to fly to Bali, would you? "I don't like it and here's a heap of examples which lead me to arrive at my preordained conclusion that it's completely broken": cool, you've found issues. If you can, fix them and share. If you can't or won't... well, there are other tools for doing version control and perhaps another might suit you better. If you have to work with people that use git, I'm sure there's some way you can generate patch sets and still get stuff done.

paulddraper 10y ago
There are two categories of possible criticisms: the model, and the implementation. Fixing the implementation means changing code, improving APIs (e.g. local/remote branch delete). Fixing the model means finding an everything different system. Yes, a graph-based VCS more complicated than a linear one. But it also matches realities of collaborative software development. And reality is complicated. As you might guess, I'm sympathetic to criticisms of inconsistency or unnecessary effort, but I believe Git (and other DCVS) to have the completely correct idea about collaborative text versioning.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  My problem is not the theory. That's easy to learn. My problem is implementation.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    Ah, the easy one then. Which DVCS implementation do you like the most?
dispose13432 10y ago
The difference is that to fly 787s you need quick response and muscle memory so all controls have to be available, and you've got to be able to fix errors in-flight. And even then you don't want to create a joystick which pulls up when pushing forward.
- justinjlynn 10y ago
  In all honesty, I think we're saying the same thing.

paulddraper 10y ago

There are two categories of possible criticisms: the model, and the implementation. Fixing the implementation means changing code, improving APIs (e.g. local/remote branch delete). Fixing the model means finding an everything different system. Yes, a graph-based VCS more complicated than a linear one. But it also matches realities of collaborative software development. And reality is complicated. As you might guess, I'm sympathetic to criticisms of inconsistency or unnecessary effort, but I believe Git (and other DCVS) to have the completely correct idea about collaborative text versioning.

dispose13432 10y ago
My problem is not the theory. That's easy to learn. My problem is implementation.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Ah, the easy one then. Which DVCS implementation do you like the most?

dispose13432 10y ago

The difference is that to fly 787s you need quick response and muscle memory so all controls have to be available, and you've got to be able to fix errors in-flight. And even then you don't want to create a joystick which pulls up when pushing forward.

justinjlynn 10y ago
In all honesty, I think we're saying the same thing.