A compact collection of examples of popular, powerful bait-writing techniques: - attacking something very popular with the intended audience (Git), to make it

A compact collection of examples of popular, powerful bait-writing techniques: - attacking something very popular with the intended audience (Git), to make it personal and create a desire to read the article - a very misleading false dichotomy (evidently, if CI tools build what's in one Git repository rather than the intended software components it's because of simplistic CI tool assumptions or lack of proper CI configuration and maintenance, not an issue with git and to a large degree not even an issue with repository structure) - vague hints that their product might be somewhat related to the issue (judging from their own product description, it could be marginally useful but only as an addition to actual CI/CD system) - fabricated problems (e.g. "Git is an excellent match for single-process applications, but it starts to fail when it comes to multi-process applications" or "It’s time for a new generation of source control that wasn’t purely designed for open-source projects, C and the Linux kernel. A source control designed for delivering modern applications in a polyglot cloud-native world."), shrouded in strange language to hide that they are bullshit - unreasonable, exaggerated statements presented as fact (e.g. "You can easily end up with repo sizes that don’t fit in your hard-drive, or clone time that ends up in the hours" or "There are certain components you will need to build and deploy hundreds of times a day") - derogatory language (e.g. "a mishmash of source providers and various artifactories", alluding to Maven repositories and similar proven ways to keep non-source files out of source control)