Part of the problem with teaching Git, aside from the terrible interface design, is probably that programmers are the ones teaching it. This is very nearly ind

Part of the problem with teaching Git, aside from the terrible interface design, is probably that programmers are the ones teaching it. This is very nearly indisputable/self-evident. Look at the Git man pages. (NB: Documentation falls under the umbrella of "teaching".) I went to a short, semi-casual digitization symposium. It was a couple hours long with a handful of lightning talks and a keynote. All the presenters were researchers in the humanities versed in the subject matter of e.g. library science. I later learned that the university had recently introduced an "open source program office" that's supposed to be a resource for crossing the discipline divide. The idea is that the progress that the world of software development is making should leak into other disciplines to the extent that it can be helpful. There's a course in the School of Information taught by a programmer that tries to do something similar: people with domain expertise are supposed to take the course to pick up a little bit of programming and get exposure to Git to help with e.g. data science projects. In thinking about how the material would hypothetically be presented to these folks, I realized that the humanities folks in particular were uniquely positioned to be able to grok Git the best—almost certainly better at grasping the underlying fundamentals than, say, a group of freshman programmers with no experience with version control, Git or otherwise. Programmers lack the foundation and interest in the underlying discipline.