8 ms·

There are a lot of people who could benefit from git (or who are forced to interact with it sporadically) for whom this is a real problem. The problem is also,

There are a lot of people who could benefit from git (or who are forced to interact with it sporadically) for whom this is a real problem. The problem is also, if you don't use it daily git knowledge decays fast. There is a piece of advise that was making the rounds (unironically) at the research institute where I worked before: "Before you do anything with git, first make a local backup copy."

bombcar 3y ago
That’s the idea behind https://xkcd.com/1597/ https://xkcd.com/1597/ and it’s more true than people will admit.
- jeltz 3y ago
  Can't agree. While learning git isn't trivial it is still easier than it was learning Subversion and at all places I have worked at a decent share of the devs understood git. If a dev cannot grasp git I would not trust them with any non-trivial code base.
  - Certhas 3y ago
    Nobody claims that git is impossible to use. It clearly isn't or it wouldn't be so successful. But it could demonstrably be better and easier and we are stuck in a local minimum of a good enough solution because of the network effects.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Many more people use git than just developers. Especially with GitHub in there.
  - redeeman 3y ago
    you mean merging branches? because in all other aspects, subversion is significantly simpler and i would say far better UI. Much of this also comes from not being distributed
- evandale 3y ago
  It really isn't. git stash is the equivalent to saving your work somewhere else and getting a fresh copy.
  - Certhas 3y ago
    No it's not. The recovery strategy when you've gotten your repo into aess is "wipe, clone, restore local backup, try the git thing again". But even then, what's the benefit of using a strange git command, which means I have to track another bit of state only visible to git, which can easily be misused (by applying the stash to the wrong commit), and anyway doesn't save the actual working directory I care about (untracked files), over simply making a file system copy?
    - evandale 3y ago
      The benefit of using a strange git command would be learning what a strange git command does and then it's no longer strange. You'll learn how to create, read, update, and delete that new bit of state in git. Then you won't have to wipe, clean, restore local backup, try the git thing again. You can start saving your work somewhere else, getting a fresh copy, and then try that git thing again when you know how git stash works. What you're proposing is like not learning how an incremental compiler works and suggesting to wipe, clean, restore local backup, try to compile the thing again to fix compile errors every time you have a compile error instead of learning how an incremental compiler works.

bombcar 3y ago

That’s the idea behind https://xkcd.com/1597/ https://xkcd.com/1597/ and it’s more true than people will admit.

jeltz 3y ago
Can't agree. While learning git isn't trivial it is still easier than it was learning Subversion and at all places I have worked at a decent share of the devs understood git. If a dev cannot grasp git I would not trust them with any non-trivial code base.
- Certhas 3y ago
  Nobody claims that git is impossible to use. It clearly isn't or it wouldn't be so successful. But it could demonstrably be better and easier and we are stuck in a local minimum of a good enough solution because of the network effects.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Many more people use git than just developers. Especially with GitHub in there.
- redeeman 3y ago
  you mean merging branches? because in all other aspects, subversion is significantly simpler and i would say far better UI. Much of this also comes from not being distributed
evandale 3y ago
It really isn't. git stash is the equivalent to saving your work somewhere else and getting a fresh copy.
- Certhas 3y ago
  No it's not. The recovery strategy when you've gotten your repo into aess is "wipe, clone, restore local backup, try the git thing again". But even then, what's the benefit of using a strange git command, which means I have to track another bit of state only visible to git, which can easily be misused (by applying the stash to the wrong commit), and anyway doesn't save the actual working directory I care about (untracked files), over simply making a file system copy?
  - evandale 3y ago
    The benefit of using a strange git command would be learning what a strange git command does and then it's no longer strange. You'll learn how to create, read, update, and delete that new bit of state in git. Then you won't have to wipe, clean, restore local backup, try the git thing again. You can start saving your work somewhere else, getting a fresh copy, and then try that git thing again when you know how git stash works. What you're proposing is like not learning how an incremental compiler works and suggesting to wipe, clean, restore local backup, try to compile the thing again to fix compile errors every time you have a compile error instead of learning how an incremental compiler works.