@Walkman I actually have been using Git extensively for 1 1/2 years. I have read the Pro Git book and many other sources cover to cover several times. I use

@Walkman I actually have been using Git extensively for 1 1/2 years. I have read the Pro Git book and many other sources cover to cover several times. I use magit with Emacs and gitk extensively. I gave up on the Android repo utility after it repeatedly goofed up the equivalents of git pull --rebase. My complaints about Git are based on direct experience and watching others struggle with it. Yes, I can and have set up Git in a very simple way not unlike an RCS project that avoids most of the issues that I discuss. No rebasing. Minimal use of branches, just a simple approximation of a development/production branch system. Nonetheless there are several problems with Git that still bit me such as the lack of sequential ids for files and the confusing terminology (staging areas, the index, etc.) and documentation. For a better Git: 1. Clean up the documentation and man pages to remove the confusing terminology. Settle on one name for the "index" and so on. 2. Ditch rebasing. 3. Use sequential ids with a suffix of some sort for local changes. e.g. 1.2 on the master, 1.3.repo.branch or something like that for local changes. Keep the SHA, hide the SHA, but give users an easy intuitive way to access the SHA if needed. 1.1 1.2 1.3 \ 1.4 1.4.myrepo.master 1.5 | | / 1.6 1.7 I would guess there is some scheme like this in some other distributed version control system. 4. Simple checkin/checkout commands like RCS Sincerely, Bit by Git