4 ms·
I've been teaching myself git on side projects for several months. I've read through Linux's man page tutorial at least twice, I think I'm starting to get git.
by jebblue 13y ago
I've been teaching myself git on side projects for several months. I've read through Linux's man page tutorial at least twice, I think I'm starting to get git. It's revolutionary. It will probably still be in use a half-century from now. It's almost too much power, I think some of the git commands should use ASCII art to paint a big picture illustrating the power of the command the user is about to invoke and double checking with the user, do you really want to "xyz", rebase, etc.
- 6ren 13y agoRemember, it's all immutable data structures. So whatever you do locally (i.e. apart from git push), the old version is still there - git reflog will show it. Git eventually garbage collects old versions (i.e. not accessible from a branch), but by default only after a month. Unfortunately... using git reflog to find the old version and undo a command itself has a learning curve. :\
- jordanthoms 13y agoThis for me is the one feature of git that I could never give up. The confidence that, once a state has entered my history, I can always get it back is really helpful when playing with things.
- Peaker 13y agoI doubt git will be used half a century from now: * Heuristic textual diffing is probably inferior to recorded actual diffs from our code editors * Git merges are monolithic, and hide conflict resolution work within them in a difficult-to-review way. On the other hand, git cherry-picks do not track history properly. Future revision control will probably solve this problem better (e.g: darcs seems like it should work better, except darcs has some other [probably more important] disadvantages).