3 ms·

As one of those people that thinks it's extremely intuitive, I have to wonder where the confused people are learning about git. The documentation on the site[0]

As one of those people that thinks it's extremely intuitive, I have to wonder where the confused people are learning about git. The documentation on the site[0] is quite clear: > A branch in Git is simply a lightweight movable pointer to one of these commits. The default branch name in Git is master. As you start making commits, you’re given a master branch that points to the last commit you made. Every time you commit, the master branch pointer moves forward automatically. It has multiple diagrams explaining how commits point to their content and their parents, and branches point to commits. The Pro Git content has been there for at least 10 years (it's what I learned from 10 years ago). Maybe the problem is just that the Internet is full of blogs that have incorrect diagrams (like those in the OP) and bad explanations, despite the main website having great documentation! [0] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Branches-in-a-Nutshell https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Branches-in-a-N...

chihuahua 3y ago
If Git was "extremely intuitive", and the documentation was "great", why would so many otherwise smart people keep writing blogs about it with incorrect diagrams? What is your theory about why so many people are having difficulty creating a correct mental model about Git, and why so many people are writing incorrect blogs about it?
- ndriscoll 3y ago
  Like I sort of implied, my theory is people haven't read the docs on the official site (or the book that's on the site), and keep regurgitating bad information that they read on some blog or howto site. I don't know why they do this. I don't make these sites, so I don't know what motivates people who do, especially people who don't understand what they're writing about. If you understand the basic design premise (commits are content-addressed immutable snapshots), the pointer stuff is kind of obvious. It has to work something like that for it to be able to be immutable if you want to be able to make branches/tags after the commit is created.
- afiori 3y ago
  In part it is because git is hard to use, in part it is because mostly people learn git by oral tradition and often treat it like sorcery.

chihuahua 3y ago

If Git was "extremely intuitive", and the documentation was "great", why would so many otherwise smart people keep writing blogs about it with incorrect diagrams? What is your theory about why so many people are having difficulty creating a correct mental model about Git, and why so many people are writing incorrect blogs about it?

ndriscoll 3y ago
Like I sort of implied, my theory is people haven't read the docs on the official site (or the book that's on the site), and keep regurgitating bad information that they read on some blog or howto site. I don't know why they do this. I don't make these sites, so I don't know what motivates people who do, especially people who don't understand what they're writing about. If you understand the basic design premise (commits are content-addressed immutable snapshots), the pointer stuff is kind of obvious. It has to work something like that for it to be able to be immutable if you want to be able to make branches/tags after the commit is created.
afiori 3y ago
In part it is because git is hard to use, in part it is because mostly people learn git by oral tradition and often treat it like sorcery.