FYI, the people who were taking my intro Python class each had 10-20 years of professional experience as a C, C++, or Java developer. So we're not talking abou

FYI, the people who were taking my intro Python class each had 10-20 years of professional experience as a C, C++, or Java developer. So we're not talking about people who are new to software, or to software engineering. I've been teaching Python (and Ruby, PostgreSQL, and Git) classes for many years now. When I teach such classes, I don't pretend that the information I'm giving them is secret or special. It's all available online, and for free, as you point out. My job, as I see it, is to give them context, insights, and exercises that will help them understand the technology in question faster than they could do on their own. (Hmm, sounds like a quote out of Vygotsky's theories of learning...) In the case of Git, my impression is that someone in the company's management said, "You guys are all experienced developers, and have used a number of version-control systems. Here's a cheat sheet for working with Git. Go!" And because no one had taken the time to gain some perspective or thoughts, they tried to use Git in the wrong way, and were frustrated by it. The thing is, I don't blame people who have a hard time understanding a piece of software. I blame the software for not being easier to understand and more accessible. So yes, all of these experienced engineers could have learned Git on their own, and that would have solved their problems. But they shouldn't have to do so, and they didn't do so. Now, given that I made some nice money teaching them Git, I'm not going to complain too much. But if Git were just a smidgen more usable, more people would embrace and use it, rather than expressing frustration and anger.