4 ms·
The benefits of DCVS, and Git in particular, are pretty clear, specially as you scale the team size. Git's command line is a UX train-wreck though. Poor consis
by hcarvalhoalves 14y ago
The benefits of DCVS, and Git in particular, are pretty clear, specially as you scale the team size.
Git's command line is a UX train-wreck though. Poor consistency, learnability and leakage about how the internals work. I think Git gets a lot of unnecessary flak because even though people realize it's superior, they are always fighting it into doing what they want.
My pet project is giving it a saner command line.
- stcredzero 14y agoWhat about mercurial?
- hcarvalhoalves 14y agoHg is fine, and it saddens me to know it doesn't see more adoption because there isn't a big nerd behind it. Git has some important factors in its favor, though: 1. In my experience, it's more robust. I had Hg throw Exceptions doing menial tasks. 2. It's more popular, there's more infra-structure available. GitHub is a big factor until we get more competition on this area. 3. Since most commands are just scripts that call lower-level tools, it's potentially more flexible. It's possible to derive new functionality without hacking too much the VCS source. That could include a saner command line.
- shubber 14y agoDCVS is a fantastic advance. Git isn't the best example of that, though. IMO, the UX problems of Git have everything to do with its internal model of revision history, not the structure of the internals. But I still pine for http://monotone.ca http://monotone.ca
- hcarvalhoalves 14y agoI would say the UX problems of Git have everything to do Linus writing it for himself.
- csense 14y ago> My pet project is giving it a saner command line. Is this "pet project" still in the planning stages, or is it published on Github? If the latter, can we have a link to it?