4 ms·

I've been using git since 2007, this only dawned on me last year. Git is especially prone to the sort of confusion where all the experts you know use it in sli

I've been using git since 2007, this only dawned on me last year. Git is especially prone to the sort of confusion where all the experts you know use it in slightly different ways so the culture is to just wing it until you're your own unique kind of wizard who can't tie his shoes because he favors sandals anyhow.

skydhash 1y ago
The Pro Git book is available online for free https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2
- kevmo314 1y ago
  This sort of thing is part of the problem. If it takes reading such a long manual to understand how to properly use Git, it's no wonder everyone's workflow is different.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
    Do you know any construction folks?
  - kragen 1y ago
    I don't see it as a problem that everyone's workflow is different, and, separately, I don't see it as a problem that it takes reading such a long manual to understand all the possibilities of Git. There is no royal road to geometry. Pro Git is a lot shorter than the textbook I learned calculus from. Unlike calculus, though, you can learn enough about Git to use it usefully in ten minutes. Maybe this sets people up for disappointment when they find out that afterwards their progress isn't that fast.
    - __MatrixMan__ 1y ago
      Agreed. I'd read the manual if there was something I needed from it, but everything is working fine. Yeah I might've rsynced between some local folders once or twice when I could've used git, maybe that was an inelegant approach, but the marginal cost of that blunder was... about as much time I've spent in this thread so whatever.
      - skydhash 1y ago
        The nice thing about knowing more about git is that it unlocks another dimension in editing code. It’s a very powerful version of undo-redo, aka time travelling. Then you start to think in term of changes and patches. Ane example of that is the suckless philosophy where extra features comes as patches and diff.
    - symbogra 1y ago
      Agreed. Back when I first came across git in 2009 I had to re-read the porcelain manual 3 times before I really got it, but then the conceptual understanding has been useful ever since. I have often the guy explaining git to newbies on my team.
      - kragen 1y ago
        There's a lot more porcelain to document than there was then; maybe that's a less useful approach now.
tianqi 1y ago
I like this comment. Over the years I've always found that whenever I see others using git, everyone uses it in different way and even for different purposes. This has left me really confused about what is the standard practice of Git exactly.
- AdrianB1 1y ago
  This is because people have different needs, Git is trying to cover too many things, there are multiple ways to achieve goals and therefore there is no standard practice. There is no single, standard way to cook chicken breast and that is a way simpler thing. The solution is to set team/department standards inside companies or use whatever you need as a single contributor. I saw attempts to standardize across a company that is quite decentralized and it failed every time.
  - exasperaited 1y ago
    > there are multiple ways to achieve goals and therefore there is no standard practice This is ultimately where, and why, github succeeded. It's not that it was free for open source. It's that it ironed out lots of kinks in a common group flow. Git is a cultural miracle, and maybe it wouldn't have got its early traction if it had been overly prescriptive or proscriptive, but more focus on those workflows earlier on would have changed history.
haskellshill 1y ago
> all the experts you know use it in slightly different ways What? Knowing that a git repo is just a folder is nowhere near "expert" level. That's basic knowledge, just like knowing that the commits are nodes of a DAG. Sadly, most git users have no idea how the tool works. It's a strange situation, it'd be like if a majority of drivers didn't know how to change gears.
- rco8786 1y ago
  The majority of drivers DON’T know how to change gears. You are simultaneously saying that something is not expert level knowledge while acknowledging that most people don’t know it. Strange.
  - singpolyma3 1y ago
    I think the idea is it shouldn't be expert level. It used to be in every tutorial. But you're right these days it may indeed be expert level knowledge
  - seba_dos1 1y ago
    > The majority of drivers DON’T know how to change gears. I'm not sure that's true, unless you only take certain parts of the world into consideration.
  - haskellshill 1y ago
    "Expert level knowledge" implies something more to me than simply few people knowing about it. It's ridiculous to say that knowing how to change gears makes you an expert driver, even if a minority know how to do it (such as in the US e.g.)
- __MatrixMan__ 1y ago
  My point is only that the understanding is uneven. I'm ready to debate the merits of subtrees vs submodules but I didn't know the folder thing. Am I weird? Yes, but here is a place where weird is commonplace.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
kragen 1y ago
With previous version-control systems, such as SVN and CVS, I found that pair programming helps a great deal with this problem. I started using Git after my last pair-programming gig, unfortunately, but I imagine it would help there too. (I started using Git in 02009, with networking strictly over ssh and, for pulls, HTTP.)
imbnwa 1y ago
This is also vim

skydhash 1y ago

The Pro Git book is available online for free https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2

kevmo314 1y ago
This sort of thing is part of the problem. If it takes reading such a long manual to understand how to properly use Git, it's no wonder everyone's workflow is different.
- PaulDavisThe1st 1y ago
  Do you know any construction folks?
- kragen 1y ago
  I don't see it as a problem that everyone's workflow is different, and, separately, I don't see it as a problem that it takes reading such a long manual to understand all the possibilities of Git. There is no royal road to geometry. Pro Git is a lot shorter than the textbook I learned calculus from. Unlike calculus, though, you can learn enough about Git to use it usefully in ten minutes. Maybe this sets people up for disappointment when they find out that afterwards their progress isn't that fast.
  - __MatrixMan__ 1y ago
    Agreed. I'd read the manual if there was something I needed from it, but everything is working fine. Yeah I might've rsynced between some local folders once or twice when I could've used git, maybe that was an inelegant approach, but the marginal cost of that blunder was... about as much time I've spent in this thread so whatever.
    - skydhash 1y ago
      The nice thing about knowing more about git is that it unlocks another dimension in editing code. It’s a very powerful version of undo-redo, aka time travelling. Then you start to think in term of changes and patches. Ane example of that is the suckless philosophy where extra features comes as patches and diff.
  - symbogra 1y ago
    Agreed. Back when I first came across git in 2009 I had to re-read the porcelain manual 3 times before I really got it, but then the conceptual understanding has been useful ever since. I have often the guy explaining git to newbies on my team.
    - kragen 1y ago
      There's a lot more porcelain to document than there was then; maybe that's a less useful approach now.

tianqi 1y ago

I like this comment. Over the years I've always found that whenever I see others using git, everyone uses it in different way and even for different purposes. This has left me really confused about what is the standard practice of Git exactly.

AdrianB1 1y ago
This is because people have different needs, Git is trying to cover too many things, there are multiple ways to achieve goals and therefore there is no standard practice. There is no single, standard way to cook chicken breast and that is a way simpler thing. The solution is to set team/department standards inside companies or use whatever you need as a single contributor. I saw attempts to standardize across a company that is quite decentralized and it failed every time.
- exasperaited 1y ago
  > there are multiple ways to achieve goals and therefore there is no standard practice This is ultimately where, and why, github succeeded. It's not that it was free for open source. It's that it ironed out lots of kinks in a common group flow. Git is a cultural miracle, and maybe it wouldn't have got its early traction if it had been overly prescriptive or proscriptive, but more focus on those workflows earlier on would have changed history.

haskellshill 1y ago

> all the experts you know use it in slightly different ways What? Knowing that a git repo is just a folder is nowhere near "expert" level. That's basic knowledge, just like knowing that the commits are nodes of a DAG. Sadly, most git users have no idea how the tool works. It's a strange situation, it'd be like if a majority of drivers didn't know how to change gears.

rco8786 1y ago
The majority of drivers DON’T know how to change gears. You are simultaneously saying that something is not expert level knowledge while acknowledging that most people don’t know it. Strange.
- singpolyma3 1y ago
  I think the idea is it shouldn't be expert level. It used to be in every tutorial. But you're right these days it may indeed be expert level knowledge
- seba_dos1 1y ago
  > The majority of drivers DON’T know how to change gears. I'm not sure that's true, unless you only take certain parts of the world into consideration.
- haskellshill 1y ago
  "Expert level knowledge" implies something more to me than simply few people knowing about it. It's ridiculous to say that knowing how to change gears makes you an expert driver, even if a minority know how to do it (such as in the US e.g.)
__MatrixMan__ 1y ago
My point is only that the understanding is uneven. I'm ready to debate the merits of subtrees vs submodules but I didn't know the folder thing. Am I weird? Yes, but here is a place where weird is commonplace.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

kragen 1y ago

With previous version-control systems, such as SVN and CVS, I found that pair programming helps a great deal with this problem. I started using Git after my last pair-programming gig, unfortunately, but I imagine it would help there too. (I started using Git in 02009, with networking strictly over ssh and, for pulls, HTTP.)

imbnwa 1y ago

This is also vim