4 ms·

Exactly. I like to say that git is a "white box". You need to understand the internals to be able to use it. Contrast this with "black boxes" where you don't

by exDM69 6y ago

Exactly. I like to say that git is a "white box". You need to understand the internals to be able to use it. Contrast this with "black boxes" where you don't have to or even can't understand what's going on. Some would argue that software shouldn't be built that way, but I will respectfully disagree. It's not an end user facing consumer product, it's a tool for professionals. You wouldn't expect anyone to operate a table saw or a milling machine without some understanding of what's inside the machine. I do agree that the git user interface is inconsistent and full of caveats. But as long as you understand it's just a directed acyclic graph of commits, you can dig yourself out of any hole you get into.

jariel 6y ago
"You wouldn't expect anyone to operate a table saw" ? Coming from a family of carpenters, I can assure you none of them really know that much at all about the internals of the table saw. Maybe a little bit. The 'black box' analogy is upside down: there are a million artifacts of the computer that you use every day for which you have no understanding. We use encapsulated concepts to be able to leverage much more complexity than we would otherwise. Having to deal with the 'inner workings' of git, is like having to have the instruction set for the chipset your computer is running on handy 'just in case'. Git is very powerful, but very poorly designed from a product perspective, there was no 'strategy' just 'add commands and flags that do this and that'. When products expose considerably more complexity than they need to for most uses cases, it's just bad design. I also have a sneaking suspicion that so many 'git experts' are really just expert within a fairly narrow range of commands/options - because when I start to ask more detailed questions, the answers are never clear. No other product has consistently caused so much confusion, wasted time. Though 95% of my personal interactions are fine, there are just too many times where we have Senior Developers, huddled on someone's machine, trying to solve some arcane problem - this is the 'not very hidden cost' of git. I would say: "Within Git, there is a much smaller and clearer CVS struggling to get out."
- exDM69 6y ago
  > Coming from a family of carpenters, I can assure you none of them really know that much at all about the internals of the table saw. Maybe a little bit. Every carpenter I know knows how to change the blade, tighten the arbor, check the fence, adjust riving knives, clean away the dust, tension the belts (if applicable) and maybe even change the motor. And there isn't much more to a table saw. Getting back to Git, I agree with your sentiment "Within Git, there is a much smaller and clearer CVS struggling to get out.". Most of us should strive to stay within the set of simple git operations. However, then there's all the other corner cases that are sometimes applicable. Such as clearing away your accidentally published private keys using `git filter-branch`. Most of us will never need this, but it's there for a reason. But if one groks the "DAG of commits" concept behind git, you can understand what filter-branch does and why and how. It's not a very complex concept. Again, I won't defend the inconsistent user interface. It could be better. But even that can be understood when needed by looking at the documentation as long as the concept is clear.
- javier10e6 6y ago
  Hey, Linus Torvalds had a word to all those CVS users a few years ago in a Google . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8

by exDM69 6y ago

jariel 6y ago

"You wouldn't expect anyone to operate a table saw" ? Coming from a family of carpenters, I can assure you none of them really know that much at all about the internals of the table saw. Maybe a little bit. The 'black box' analogy is upside down: there are a million artifacts of the computer that you use every day for which you have no understanding. We use encapsulated concepts to be able to leverage much more complexity than we would otherwise. Having to deal with the 'inner workings' of git, is like having to have the instruction set for the chipset your computer is running on handy 'just in case'. Git is very powerful, but very poorly designed from a product perspective, there was no 'strategy' just 'add commands and flags that do this and that'. When products expose considerably more complexity than they need to for most uses cases, it's just bad design. I also have a sneaking suspicion that so many 'git experts' are really just expert within a fairly narrow range of commands/options - because when I start to ask more detailed questions, the answers are never clear. No other product has consistently caused so much confusion, wasted time. Though 95% of my personal interactions are fine, there are just too many times where we have Senior Developers, huddled on someone's machine, trying to solve some arcane problem - this is the 'not very hidden cost' of git. I would say: "Within Git, there is a much smaller and clearer CVS struggling to get out."

exDM69 6y ago
> Coming from a family of carpenters, I can assure you none of them really know that much at all about the internals of the table saw. Maybe a little bit. Every carpenter I know knows how to change the blade, tighten the arbor, check the fence, adjust riving knives, clean away the dust, tension the belts (if applicable) and maybe even change the motor. And there isn't much more to a table saw. Getting back to Git, I agree with your sentiment "Within Git, there is a much smaller and clearer CVS struggling to get out.". Most of us should strive to stay within the set of simple git operations. However, then there's all the other corner cases that are sometimes applicable. Such as clearing away your accidentally published private keys using `git filter-branch`. Most of us will never need this, but it's there for a reason. But if one groks the "DAG of commits" concept behind git, you can understand what filter-branch does and why and how. It's not a very complex concept. Again, I won't defend the inconsistent user interface. It could be better. But even that can be understood when needed by looking at the documentation as long as the concept is clear.
javier10e6 6y ago
Hey, Linus Torvalds had a word to all those CVS users a few years ago in a Google . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8