3 ms·

> bad and confusing defaults Compared to what? It's leagues better than what it replaced (SVN & CVS) and it's pretty comparable to Hg tbh. So what's your pref

> bad and confusing defaults Compared to what? It's leagues better than what it replaced (SVN & CVS) and it's pretty comparable to Hg tbh. So what's your preference here?

alkonaut 9y ago
> Compared to what? Compared to how it would work today if it wasn't constrained by backwards compatibility, and it was designed for ergonomics rather than power. Every time a best practice changes, or a new default is considered best practice, or you notice a typical usage pattern means a particular command is much more common - then the interface should reflect it. There have been multiple wrappers such as this one - but there could be room for a big official cli tool that is not backwards compatible (want to script? - call git directly). > It's leagues better than what it replaced (SVN & CVS) a Git as a tool is better than svn and cvs - but I don't agree its interface is. This is of course an unfair comparison since svn, cvs etc is so much simpler (It's after all a LOT easier to make a good UI for a ToDo app than for facebook). The best comparison for an UI of a "modern" vcs is git vs mercurial.
- abritinthebay 9y ago
  I find mercurial (I referred to that above as Hg) to be more or less the same as Git. Their CLI commands are very very similar. What specifically are you complaining about here?
  - alkonaut 9y ago
    I think hg is more consistent, more polished, and sometimes involves a bit fewer steps to accomplish the same tasks. One of the best (and funniest) criticisms of the git command line is the famous git koans. http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ git branch -d git remote rm Is a prime example of how, if you designed it from scratch, you wouldn't leave inconsistent. "List things", "delete things" etc are activities that should work the same for all kinds of objects. the Git cli isn't designed with that thought. It's organically grown and every change is more or less irreversible because the human interface UI is used in programming (What I like to think of as the biggest flaw of Unix)

> bad and confusing defaults Compared to what? It's leagues better than what it replaced (SVN & CVS) and it's pretty comparable to Hg tbh. So what's your preference here?

alkonaut 9y ago

> Compared to what? Compared to how it would work today if it wasn't constrained by backwards compatibility, and it was designed for ergonomics rather than power. Every time a best practice changes, or a new default is considered best practice, or you notice a typical usage pattern means a particular command is much more common - then the interface should reflect it. There have been multiple wrappers such as this one - but there could be room for a big official cli tool that is not backwards compatible (want to script? - call git directly). > It's leagues better than what it replaced (SVN & CVS) a Git as a tool is better than svn and cvs - but I don't agree its interface is. This is of course an unfair comparison since svn, cvs etc is so much simpler (It's after all a LOT easier to make a good UI for a ToDo app than for facebook). The best comparison for an UI of a "modern" vcs is git vs mercurial.

abritinthebay 9y ago
I find mercurial (I referred to that above as Hg) to be more or less the same as Git. Their CLI commands are very very similar. What specifically are you complaining about here?
- alkonaut 9y ago
  I think hg is more consistent, more polished, and sometimes involves a bit fewer steps to accomplish the same tasks. One of the best (and funniest) criticisms of the git command line is the famous git koans. http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2013/04/git-koans/ git branch -d git remote rm Is a prime example of how, if you designed it from scratch, you wouldn't leave inconsistent. "List things", "delete things" etc are activities that should work the same for all kinds of objects. the Git cli isn't designed with that thought. It's organically grown and every change is more or less irreversible because the human interface UI is used in programming (What I like to think of as the biggest flaw of Unix)