| 1 |
Hello, Rich. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:53:00AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:24 AM, James <wireless@×××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > It there an easy, automated way to have this inforation on my system(s) |
| 7 |
> > without extra keystrokes? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
[ .... ] |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> While I do believe the ChangeLogs will show up again for those who |
| 12 |
> prefer them, I think that taking a bit of time to learn to use git is |
| 13 |
> going to make your life better in the long haul. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I disagree completely. A little time spent on git is time wasted. Only |
| 16 |
a lot of time spent on git is useful. git is to VCSs as assembler is to |
| 17 |
programming languages. To use either effectively, you've got to have a |
| 18 |
complete grasp of the internal logic of git/the processor. This is in |
| 19 |
stark contrast with, say, Mercurial or CVS, or a language like C. For |
| 20 |
comparison, the collected man pages of git (collected into an info file) |
| 21 |
weigh in at 1.9 Mb. For Mercurial, the single man page is just 315k. I |
| 22 |
speak from bitter experience. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> I think that in time people will stop using ChangeLogs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I think people will be using ChangeLogs for as long as they exist. The |
| 27 |
ChangeLog is a very convenient and useful reference. By comparison, |
| 28 |
typing in arcane commands to git is a pain, even if you're only going to |
| 29 |
be doing it once whilst creating a script. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> -- |
| 32 |
> Rich |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). |
Archives