No, it means you're using the wrong abstraction. It seems a large number of users prefers to work at a different level of abstraction than git requires. git m

No, it means you're using the wrong abstraction. It seems a large number of users prefers to work at a different level of abstraction than git requires. git makes you face up to the fact that your abstractions are wrong. Strangely mercurial tackles the exact same abstractions, yet has a much friendlier user-interface. The standard-rebuttal at this point will be "Fine, use mercurial then". I wonder if, at some point, more users will start doing that than the git-community would like. I, for one, am certainly tempted, but have so far held out due to the switching cost and because hg is, of course, not without flaws either. However, I don't think this "If it hurts then you're doing it wrong"-attitude can be healthy for git in the longterm. A bad user-interface remains a bad user-interface, no matter how you spin it. The big problem I see is not even with git currently having this bad user-interface, but rather with the widespread reluctance in git-circles to even think about ways to improve it.