> have you ever worked with other people on the same project? or Gerrit? There's really nothing simple, quick or logical about Git when you need to do things li

> have you ever worked with other people on the same project? or Gerrit? There's really nothing simple, quick or logical about Git when you need to do things like: Yes, I currently manage my team's merge process and review all code that gets merged into our main repository. I tend to only do trunk-based repositories, work mostly in infrastructure, so I imagine my process is a little different than some traditional "dev" ones, but it's largely uncomplicated on my 5 person team. > copy some files from another repo into yours while preserving file history I'm not really sure what this means - I don't often have to do this, can't imagine why I would have to do this. If by "file history" you mean the commits on the file from the other repo? I can't imagine why I'd do that and it sounds like an anti pattern to me, and I avoid doing things like that at all costs, or would just create a git submodule if I really, really had to have that history and file in my repo for whatever reason. > copying files within a repo while preserving file history (if you just copy+paste you lose, if you edit the files after moving with git mv, but before comitting the move first, you lose all history) Really never have felt a need for doing this in any repository I've worked in so I guess no, for similar reasons as my above comment > deleting 1 file from all commits in a repo (almost impossible without using an external non-git tool) Why would you have to do this with any kind of frequency? If I did, and it was sufficiently complicated, I would put it in automation and write it once and call it a day. > dealing with a rebase that was pushed that shouldn't have happened I'm seeing now from other comments what the difference here is, I don't really ever use rebase and never have felt the need to. If I ever worked for a team where I didn't get to decide that, we had tooling that managed that part or wrote it. > I could go on and on with examples of things that should be trivial but aren't. I am a little curious, because some of what you wrote sounds a little bizarre to me, but I guess I'm probably in a much different domain.