I think the CLI is more to blame than the author says. For example, the "branches are more like bookmarks" point. Well, I think it would have been easier if gi

I think the CLI is more to blame than the author says. For example, the "branches are more like bookmarks" point. Well, I think it would have been easier if git called them bookmarks, like Mercurial. About the "fuzzy identity" part, it is mostly a consequence of git fuzzy naming scheme. Like the "git reset" command that does many different things, the result is that no one know what a "reset" is. I have never struggled with the idea that a commit is a "worldline". I think that calling it a worldline is making it more confusing than it is. For me, it just represents some work done, but the git tendency to mix high level concepts with implementation details gives people weird ideas.