3 ms·

I don't think you're seeing my point. The documentation doesn't do anything to convince the reader that gitless' UI is more consistent than git's. Let's prete

• StavrosK 12y ago
  They aren't, though. Have you seen how removals for anything use the same option, or there's no push or pull, or remotes are much more sane, or creating repos is the same regardless of whether you're cloning or initting? It's much more geared towards actions rather than commands.
  • chousuke 12y ago
    That's the thing. I haven't seen anything, because the documentation doesn't mention it. You might be entirely justified, but I can't tell because neither you or the documentation elaborate on any of my questions. gitless remotes look exactly the same as git remotes as far as I can tell. Why are they saner? git init vs. git clone is a triviality, though I'll grant you that init works for both use cases publish is just a synonym for push, and pull is what gitless seems to call merge. gitless seems to outright ignore the fetch/merge distinction. How do I fetch commits from a remote repository without merging them? Overall the impression I get from that single web page of documentation is that gitless is a porcelain that misses the point on many things. I realize I might be completely wrong, but gitless' documentation neither answers my questions nor encourages me to try it out. You're seeing negative comments wondering about gitless' purpose because the introduction fails to offer any motivation.