- Its user interface is inconsistent and poorly designed. As I worked through this website (which is great by the way) it struck me that by focusing so clearly

- Its user interface is inconsistent and poorly designed. As I worked through this website (which is great by the way) it struck me that by focusing so clearly and completely on the underlying object graph that's supposed to lead to nirvana for learners, the site does a great job of highlighting the obtuseness of Git's command set. I mean you've got a great honking big graph on the screen, another big honking graph to the side, and you're asked to "make this one look like that one". This should be so easy now that you see it - essentially drag and drop albeit with text commands - it should have almost no pedagogical value (if you built a model in Lego then it would literally be child's play). Yet even having identified what I needed to move and where I wanted to move it, the challenge remained - what is the weirdly named command I must type to make that (and only that) happen? Which way round are the arguments again? (eg. 'git rebase', to move stuff from the current branch to somewhere else, versus 'git merge', to 'move' stuff from somewhere else to the current branch, always gives me pause.) I'm most grateful to this website for telling me about 'git branch -f <branch name> <destination>' as a way to repoint a ref. To think that all this time I thought you had to checkout the ref, reset --soft, then maybe checkout again if you wanted to get HEAD back to where it started (all the while dealing with the side effects and possible conflicts with your working directory). None of the tutorials or books I had read, such as "git for computer scientists", "Think Like a Git", or the "Pro Git" book ever mentioned (correct me if I'm wrong) that fairly fundamental operation despite schooling me quite thoroughly in the "think of the object graph" mindset. (Yeah it's in the man page, but then there's a lot of stuff in the manpage so noticing it is the problem there. And I tend to assume any option named "--force" is something that I shouldn't be messing with. Why not "git repoint-ref" or "git move-ref" anyway? Git has so many top-level commands already, it doesn't seem like they're worried about polluting that namespace.)