3 ms·

What exactly is wrong with the git interface?

• grannyg00se 12y ago
  Parent is downvoted but this seems like a valid question to me. The interface consists of git sub commands and their flags. One could argue that there are too many flags, or even too many commands, but why not offer flexibility when you can as long as you keep sane defaults? I think that git commit, init, add, fetch, branch, checkout, merge, and push all have sane defaults and anybody can pick up very basic git usage using those commands in less than a few hours. Things get complicated when you start looking at the details, but I don't see any way around that. And the interface doesn't change. It's just a matter of learning more flags and commands.
• oneandoneis2 12y ago
  I've asked this a time or two, and the answers I've received so far have always boiled down to: "I don't know how to use git" or "I don't know how to alias complex commands I use frequently" Maybe you'll have better luck with the responses you get :)
• kasey_junk 12y ago
  I have tons of little problems with it that would be silly to enumerate, but they fall into 3 broad categories. 1) Terrible tab completion support. 2) Multiple command/option permutations that do nearly the same thing with small subtle differences. 3) Lack of cohesion amongst the community around best practices (especially with regards to branching/merging/rebasing).
  • danielweber 12y ago
    Each git command seems like it was done by its own subcommittee without regards to what the other commands do. Functionality overlaps. Mnemonics from one command don't carry to another. I forget the specific example, but one command would be colorized with command line options, and another would be colorized with environment settings. It's very un-Unix.