| 1 |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 06:45:47PM +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: |
| 2 |
> There are all sorts of stupidities in it - like `push' and `pull' not |
| 3 |
> being opposites |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
That's fair. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> `clone' not producing a clone, but a new repository |
| 8 |
> radically different from the original. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
That is not true. It is a clone, just with all of the most recent |
| 11 |
versions of the files checked out and availble for editing. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Unnecessary arcane teminology, and standard terminology perversely |
| 14 |
> used to mean something different. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
That's also fair. I remember reading a bunch of stuff about the git team |
| 17 |
generally doing the exact opposite of Subversion whenever they could |
| 18 |
because they disliked it so much. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > If you understand the design you'll know that there must be a way to |
| 21 |
> > do something, but you'll spend 15min figuring out which command line |
| 22 |
> > utility does it best. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> I don't want to have to understand the design. I just want to be a |
| 25 |
> user. I've got enough things competing for limited mental capacity as |
| 26 |
> it is. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
What? I don't think Rich means understanding all of the implementation |
| 29 |
details, just high-level concepts like what a branch is, what a commit |
| 30 |
is, and merging and rebasing. These topics - branching, merging, etc. - |
| 31 |
are central to how a team works, so it is important to understand them |
| 32 |
and how whatever VCS you're using deals with them. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Alec |
Archives