4 ms·

Calling it "poorly thought through" when you haven't taken the time to understand it is not a compelling argument. Neither is saying the OP hasn't taken the ti

• jshen 16y ago
  I don't understand what your saying. I said that the OP doesn't understand git basics, and that a critique based on a lack of understanding is not compelling. Are you suggesting that I'm wrong about his level of understanding or that one can make a valid critique of something they don't understand?
  • bokchoi 16y ago
    I'm saying that perhaps his level of understanding is not to blame. Most responses to complaints about git are "you just don't understand." It is tiring.
    • alinajaf 16y ago
      It may be tiring, but it's still true. "[svn|rails|regex|whatever] is bad because I don't get it" is not an argument, just an expression of laziness/lack of interest.
    • jshen 16y ago
      I went into barnes and noble one day and picked up the Pro Git book and sat in the cafe and read it for a few hours. After that I understood git fairly well and the things the OP said show that he hasn't put forth this minimal amount of effort. I don't think a few hours of study for a power tool is too much to ask, and I think it's reasonable to dismiss the arguments of someone who clearly hasn't put forth a sincere effort to understand it. Also, the book is available for free online http://progit.org/book/ http://progit.org/book/