I'd say rather 'Version Control is hard'. It should not be that technical. The very notion of versioning terrified quite a few non-technical but otherwise ver

I'd say rather 'Version Control is hard'. It should not be that technical. The very notion of versioning terrified quite a few non-technical but otherwise very proficient office users in my experience trying to sell them the benefits of VCS. Even GitHub or Jira would be considered "for programmers". On so many occasions I would fail to convince such users to embrace version control in their workflow, even with some Tortoise-like GUIs. Immediacy of copying their work folder or document and appending a date or "-final" tag to the name is all their busy minds are ready to adopt. And it does make sense, no blame. This just tells that current concept of Version Control is indeed serving the very specific needs of maintainers, not much the mundane needs of normal users. Thus the complexity of the CLI in the name of flexibility. My expectation is that Version Control should be mostly transparent to user. It's just some internal housekeeping. On a basic level it's just a Save/Save As operation with very much versatile project-level Undo and Open. MS Office's Track Changes is a familiar workflow for many users, perhaps a similar approach could be adopted for Change Management in broader and less proprietary context. In Git's parlance, Mr. Version Control is still a plumber that offers users some porcelane sinks, yet user's projects need to live in a whole house with already functioning works and appliances. I want to believe that Version Control will one day become a basic amenity, not an "exotic" feature that needs constant attention.