5 ms·

care to elaborate? I fail to see how git would be considered 'overkill' for a project.

bildung 7y ago
Other version control software has way simpler syntax and workflow. Subversion for example. The complexity of git makes total sense if you indeed have a complex, multi-HEADed project like the Linux kernel. But most software isn't Linux.
- Scarblac 7y ago
  Subversion needs a server, for one. For a single user and a single file, Git is already less overhead.
  - taco_emoji 7y ago
    It doesn't, actually, you can host a repo on the filesystem without any sort of server process. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.ref.svnadmin.c.create.html http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.ref.svnadmin.c.create...
- vultour 7y ago
  You literally need to know two commands to work with git in a simple project; add and commit. I don’t see how that is any complicated?
  - jcranmer 7y ago
    By that argument, you literally need to know a single command to work with Mercurial (hg commit) or SVN (svn commit), or hell, even CVS (cvs commit).
    - drunken-serval 7y ago
      git commit -a then.
    - catalogia 7y ago
      > "Mercurial (hg commit) or SVN (svn commit), or hell, even CVS (cvs commit)." Why would I [re]learn those tools if I already know git? If I'm going to move to a new VCS, it's going to be one that actually gives me something I didn't have before, like Fossil. Not some other VCS that captures the same concepts with a slightly different cli UX (which hardly even impacts me at all, since I rarely interact with such systems on the command line rather than through porcelain provided by an editor extension.)
    - vultour 7y ago
      Sure, I'm not saying they're more difficult, but people here are saying that git adds too much complexity in simple projects. It doesn't, but it lets you expand into the complexity if you ever need it in the future.
- celticninja 7y ago
  Git is a simple or as complex as you need it to be. And the complexity doesnt come at a cost to anyone who doesn't require it but uses git anyway.
- baot 7y ago
  You've misinterpreted you finding git to be difficult as everyone finding it difficult, leading to an argument based on git being difficult that will never be compelling to those who didn't find learning git to be difficult. I'm one of them - I don't have any CS training - and so are the interns and new starters who use it without complaint in my workplace. If you are forced into using it to everything but still haven't taken the steps necessary for understanding it, why is that my problem?
stephen_g 7y ago
I agree - I even use it for tiny personal projects that I don’t even push anywhere because you can instantly get version control with a single ‘git init .’ in a directory. It’s plenty scalable and has very little overhead...

Other version control software has way simpler syntax and workflow. Subversion for example. The complexity of git makes total sense if you indeed have a complex, multi-HEADed project like the Linux kernel. But most software isn't Linux.

Scarblac 7y ago
Subversion needs a server, for one. For a single user and a single file, Git is already less overhead.
- taco_emoji 7y ago
  It doesn't, actually, you can host a repo on the filesystem without any sort of server process. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.ref.svnadmin.c.create.html http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.ref.svnadmin.c.create...
vultour 7y ago
You literally need to know two commands to work with git in a simple project; add and commit. I don’t see how that is any complicated?
- jcranmer 7y ago
  By that argument, you literally need to know a single command to work with Mercurial (hg commit) or SVN (svn commit), or hell, even CVS (cvs commit).
  - drunken-serval 7y ago
    git commit -a then.
  - catalogia 7y ago
    > "Mercurial (hg commit) or SVN (svn commit), or hell, even CVS (cvs commit)." Why would I [re]learn those tools if I already know git? If I'm going to move to a new VCS, it's going to be one that actually gives me something I didn't have before, like Fossil. Not some other VCS that captures the same concepts with a slightly different cli UX (which hardly even impacts me at all, since I rarely interact with such systems on the command line rather than through porcelain provided by an editor extension.)
  - vultour 7y ago
    Sure, I'm not saying they're more difficult, but people here are saying that git adds too much complexity in simple projects. It doesn't, but it lets you expand into the complexity if you ever need it in the future.
celticninja 7y ago
Git is a simple or as complex as you need it to be. And the complexity doesnt come at a cost to anyone who doesn't require it but uses git anyway.
baot 7y ago
You've misinterpreted you finding git to be difficult as everyone finding it difficult, leading to an argument based on git being difficult that will never be compelling to those who didn't find learning git to be difficult. I'm one of them - I don't have any CS training - and so are the interns and new starters who use it without complaint in my workplace. If you are forced into using it to everything but still haven't taken the steps necessary for understanding it, why is that my problem?

stephen_g 7y ago

I agree - I even use it for tiny personal projects that I don’t even push anywhere because you can instantly get version control with a single ‘git init .’ in a directory. It’s plenty scalable and has very little overhead...