So putting aside your argument that I completely disagree with but a lot of people have already voiced my concerns. > The guy who knows every command of git ba

So putting aside your argument that I completely disagree with but a lot of people have already voiced my concerns. > The guy who knows every command of git backwards is welcome to apply for a job managing a git repo or something if such a thing exists? Yes, this is the job of a maintainer in fact. They exist in a variety of organisations but maybe not enough. The best example is the linux kernel. Developers are expected to maintain their own local tree. When it comes to contributing code to the kernel, the patches are sent in a standardised manner to a mailing list and a maintainer then handles dealing with branches, rebases and merges. This means that developers don't need to know any more git than they really want to learn, aside from how to use git-format-patch and git-send-email which are really quite simple tools with an incredibly vast number of tutorials out there explaining them. This means that people who insist that it's "not their job" to learn git can achieve the requirements of "patches which build at every step and contain isolated step by step changes" using a GUI or doing something really stupid like copying the code aside, deleting and re-cloning the repository and then pasting and committing each step. It also means that people who actually know how to use git can get the job done in a fraction of the time. It also means that a carpenter^Wdeveloper's insistence to not learn how to use a claw hammer^W^W^Wgit will not affect their fellow coworkers/cocontributors.