5 ms·

Good morning I hate git All of my co-workers use git GUIs. I use the CLI, not out of love for it, but because git is so needlessly complex and arcane that I'm

Good morning I hate git All of my co-workers use git GUIs. I use the CLI, not out of love for it, but because git is so needlessly complex and arcane that I'm scared to use GUIs. For every other tool, I prefer to use GUIs, but they're simple enough that I don't get surprised and there's no major consequences (such as making me spend 2 hours researching a solution) if there's an issue. Not so with git. Git has an awful CLI. It's needlessly complex for 99.999% of projects. I write in Evernote notebooks as a learning journal and also a personal knowledge base (howto guides, troubleshooting guide, snippets, etc). Every note is written for a good reason, there's no meaningless info in it. Here is the number of notes in my git notebook, along with a few others for comparison: -git: 55 notes -Linux: 200 notes -C++: 130 notes It's insane that git occupies so much mental space considering it's a single-purpose tool. I truly wish it was never created, or at least never caught on, we might have another decentralized VCS dominating the space with an interface written for normal people. If anyone other than Linus Torvalds had written it, we would all be using something else. If midwit geeks weren't so vain and wanted to feel cool for using the same VCS as the Linux kernel, we could've been using something else. (No, I can't choose to use something else, the dominant winner affects you whether you like it or not, same as IE6 and Chrome.)

goku12 3y ago
> It's insane that git occupies so much mental space considering it's a single-purpose tool. No arguments here. What I meant is that it's very hard for me to understand what's happening behind the scenes unless I'm using the CLI. The tool is hard nevertheless. > If midwit geeks weren't so vain and wanted to feel cool for using the same VCS as the Linux kernel, we could've been using something else. The fact is, git won. I was personally into mercurial. The CLI was much more sane. One of the biggest issue with git is that it uses both the snapshot model (for the storage format) and the diff/patch model (for many operations like merge and rebase). You have to know which of these applies to any operation for it to make sense.
- Hendrikto 3y ago
  > One of the biggest issue with git is that it uses both the snapshot model and the diff/patch model Git always uses snapshots. The diff thing is just a question of how this is exposed in the UI.
  - goku12 3y ago
    The tree state is saved as snapshots. However, operations like merging (3-way merge) and rebase are certainly based on diffs/patches. For example, consider the case of an interactive rebase where you delete a commit. If it was based on snapshots, only that commit should disappear. The changes introduced by that commit should remain in the subsequent snapshots/commits. However, that is not what happens. The change introduced by the commit disappears from all subsequent commits/snapshots. This means that all the subsequent snapshots are modified by subtracting the patch from the commit that was deleted.
stcroixx 3y ago
Agree so much. Prior to git, I used several version control systems and none required me to memorize more than 3 or 4 simple commands. I hate git more than any other software, such a tedious waste of time.

goku12 3y ago

> It's insane that git occupies so much mental space considering it's a single-purpose tool. No arguments here. What I meant is that it's very hard for me to understand what's happening behind the scenes unless I'm using the CLI. The tool is hard nevertheless. > If midwit geeks weren't so vain and wanted to feel cool for using the same VCS as the Linux kernel, we could've been using something else. The fact is, git won. I was personally into mercurial. The CLI was much more sane. One of the biggest issue with git is that it uses both the snapshot model (for the storage format) and the diff/patch model (for many operations like merge and rebase). You have to know which of these applies to any operation for it to make sense.

Hendrikto 3y ago
> One of the biggest issue with git is that it uses both the snapshot model and the diff/patch model Git always uses snapshots. The diff thing is just a question of how this is exposed in the UI.
- goku12 3y ago
  The tree state is saved as snapshots. However, operations like merging (3-way merge) and rebase are certainly based on diffs/patches. For example, consider the case of an interactive rebase where you delete a commit. If it was based on snapshots, only that commit should disappear. The changes introduced by that commit should remain in the subsequent snapshots/commits. However, that is not what happens. The change introduced by the commit disappears from all subsequent commits/snapshots. This means that all the subsequent snapshots are modified by subtracting the patch from the commit that was deleted.

stcroixx 3y ago

Agree so much. Prior to git, I used several version control systems and none required me to memorize more than 3 or 4 simple commands. I hate git more than any other software, such a tedious waste of time.