|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: On the popularity of git |
Date: | Sat, 31 Oct 2015 18:58:58 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/42.0 |
On 10/31/2015 06:50 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
I just want to be a user, as one can quite easily be a user of hg or bzr.
Nobody's asking you to be a Git developer here. I know I'm not asking, nor am I one.
Being a user of git involves learning its internal structures. (Note the people recently emphasising the internal representation of a git branch to me, talking about pointers to its tip, and so on. I really don't want to have to know about such stuff.)
To a reasonably proficient Git user, that sounds like "I don't want to know what graphs are", or a C programmer saying they don't want to bother knowing about memory layout (that's a thing, right?).
This stuff is easy enough to learn that claims "I don't want to" don't sound compelling at all.
It is evident that when the UI for git was "designed" nobody of any experience (or taste) in UIs was involved in the process. Nobody knew when to say "stop!". So there are _lots_ of commands, and the ones used most often have 20, 30, 50 options to learn about, some of which do several distinctly different things (e.g. git checkout).
You don't learn all commands and all options. You first figure out what you want to do, and then learn how to do it. Much easier.
But in both of them, the commit message template informed you which files were being committed, giving you the opportunity to abort.
Guess what. Git does the same thing. Just not in the Emacs interface provided by VC.
The vagueness and uncertainty introduced by git's two stage committing,
No such thing.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |