Just gotta LOVE git!

OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

I still prefer SCCS and SVN over Git. Thank you.
May I assume the total absence of any reasoning is a hint that the reason is "I don't want to learn something new"? 🤔
 

Cthulhux

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 190
Messages: 365

See, one of the problems with Git is that I’d actually need to learn it, because its command-line interface is incoherent and confusing at best, with no overall technical advantage over most other VCSs.
 

Cthulhux

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 190
Messages: 365

for "prior knowledge" (expectations) from using other systems?
Even for those who started their journey into VCSs with Git.

See my initial post as one example for lots of technical advantages ;)
You mean the "lots" as in "one, i.e. rebase"?
Well, git rebase is a good example for things which exist in Git as a workaround for a conceptual disadvantage. It would not even need a "rebase" command if it adopted Darcs's patch strategy.
 
OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

Even for those who started their journey into VCSs with Git.
Lots of people disagree. Just saying ;)
Well, git rebase is a good example for things which exist in Git as a workaround for a conceptual disadvantage. It would not even need a "rebase" command if it adopted Darcs's patch strategy.
Interesting straw after stating you'd prefer svn. Now argumenting with a different distributed(!) system is clearly moving the goalposts. 😏 Still, automatic reordering sounds nice, but can't solve all the problems. "rebase" (with manual reordering) is explicit and works, and the OP is about how well git detects stuff that can be automated with this explicit strategy.
 
OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

See, what I mean is that there is no single feature in Git that would not have better counterparts elsewhere.
Especially in svn. Yep, you made your hilariously inconsistent point 🤡 – have a 🐟
 

astyle

Daemon

Reaction score: 625
Messages: 1,412

FWIW, CVS actually got me burned in college in 2003-04. I made a commit without really knowing how things work - and it was very difficult to undo the mistake. I think the repo had to be re-set up from scratch. Yeah, it was for a class project, just a learning experience for everyone, and it was early in the 10-week semester, but time was wasted recovering from my mistake. I ended up teaming up with someone who knew CVS way better than me, and he was the one making sure my code compiles and does not break other stuff. I was the one making sure the code complies with homework specs, as in making sure the correct algorithm was implemented within sections of code. My classmate did a better job than me managing the CVS commits.

I actually tried to learn SVN after that class was over, but quickly got lost, and set it aside - until Git burst onto the scene. Now I'm seeing that major projects are moving to Git, and I'm thinking - maybe it's time to devote some time to learning git. It can be as simple or as fancy as I want it to be, and still be very useful without all the extras. For me, at least, it's much easier to follow the git how-tos than for svn. It is much more coherent, and things do add up in the logic.

Zirias : Some of the best sashimi around comes from bluefin tuna.
 
OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

Cthulhux, on forums, I respect people mainly based on what they write. "stupid or trolling" is not a relevant question in that context.
 

Cthulhux

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 190
Messages: 365

I respect people mainly based on what they write.

People who disagree with your claim that Git was better than every other VCS in even one single aspect have automatically lost your respect?
I see.

I think I'll end this discussion here.
 
OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

BTW, for those who want a "claim", here's one:

It's very likely that feature X is "better" in SCM X than in git, and feature Y is "better" in SCM Y than in git, and so on…
But as a whole, git is pretty nice. Compared to svn (where we're coming from in the context of FreeBSD), it's just awesome, especially if you're a contributor (without "commit bit") it makes life much simpler!

And about how to lose my respect? Easy. You could for example lead a crusade discussion, using stylistic crap like e.g. moving the goalposts. There, you lost my respect 😏
 

rorgoroth

Member

Reaction score: 31
Messages: 41

I use Mercurial for everything personal, and have it mirrored to git where needed.

I don't find git to be very user friendly, my gitconfig is set up with aliases to make my life easier but often I will force push through any issues because my time is not worthless and I've got better things to do than read 20 minutes of the genius of stackoverflow offering up 20 different solutions of which almost all are outdated, broken or just don't work at all. I'd certainly pick git over SVN or CVS though *shudders* 😂
 
OP
Zirias

Zirias

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,866

rorgoroth: A comparison with other distributed(!) SCMs is probably fair. Although my experience is different, I use "force push" only on my private stuff (branches, sometimes whole repos) with noone else collaborating, as it is intended … but I guess you could complain about git's "learning curve". Of course, there's some "bandwagon effect" when deciding to which DSCM to move from SVN. Almost any dev active in OSS development (there are very few exceptions) "knows" git…

It's just ridiculous to see people claim "I prefer SVN", and when asking critically, you get stuff like "distributed SCM foo does bar better!".
 

astyle

Daemon

Reaction score: 625
Messages: 1,412

I use Mercurial for everything personal, and have it mirrored to git where needed.

I don't find git to be very user friendly, my gitconfig is set up with aliases to make my life easier but often I will force push through any issues because my time is not worthless and I've got better things to do than read 20 minutes of the genius of stackoverflow offering up 20 different solutions of which almost all are outdated, broken or just don't work at all. I'd certainly pick git over SVN or CVS though *shudders* 😂
y'know, just about all software is like that - 20 solutions on SO and in other places. This is partly why we have FreeBSD forums - a community of users who can help you think things through, and make sense of what you see on the Internet. FWIW, I recently had the same experience with Apache setup - 20 different partial solutions on the Internet, and then the forum users right here helped me with commentary and examples. I was able to decide on what to do pretty quickly - much quicker than if I had to comb through SO and other partial solutions on the Internet.
 

Crivens

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator

Reaction score: 1,680
Messages: 2,539

Ah, smells of Vi./.Emacs in here. Can we keep the lid on such a can of fermenting fish and be civil? Or is this heading the way of pc./.mac?
 

Jose

Daemon

Reaction score: 1,069
Messages: 1,277

Now do they?


See, what I mean is that there is no single feature in Git that would not have better counterparts elsewhere.
Yes, but there's no other single SCM system that has all the features of Git. I hear great things about Perforce, and many very successful companies started out using it, but it's closed source. Heck, Linus probably got a lot of the ideas for the design of Git from using Bitkeeper in the kernel for years - also closed-source. Mercurial has a very nice command-line interface, but its Web interface is ass, and it's in the maw of the Python 2 -> 3 monster at the moment.

I have to say that git might be a bit of jumping on the bandwagon. Using git because Linux did and no other reason. There are still detractors who have a point. The only reason I started using it, years ago, is cause I had a project that required it and they only started using it because...because....errrr...uh...they don't know.
I switched to Git the very first time for very good reasons. Svn simply could not handle having the master branch merged back to a feature branch repeatedly. It would think every previous merge was a conflict. One of us had to spend sometimes days disentangling the BS conflicts from the real ones. We switched to Git, and that problem simply went away. It was one of those things that doesn't happen, but it did, and now I'm a confirmed Git fanboi for life.

We considered both Mercurial and Git, and chose the latter because it already had wider adoption. I wasn't sure about that choice back then because the Mercurial command-line interface was quite a bit nicer. I'm glad we chose Git in retrospect.
 

Jose

Daemon

Reaction score: 1,069
Messages: 1,277

Wrong.
Mercurial and BitKeeper have even more features than Git; and those are only the first two that come to my mind.
Bitkeeper does not support signed revisions and it's no longer developed. I've already explained why I'm glad I didn't choose Mercurial, but according to the chart you linked, it does not support Unicode file names in Windows. Seems like a big deal to me.

Not always a bad thing.
 
Top