11–20 of 309 posts
While git is good under the hood, then it has not really user-friendly interface.
Also git heavily benefits from GitHub's success, which locks us with git :(
I wrote about it here https://trolololo.xyz/github - GitHub is really good, but there's a small problem with that
One of the most amazing things about Fossil is how you can track the history of a file not just backwards, but also forwards, something which is pretty whacky with git.
As for DVCS, the best one I've used is Darcs: https://darcs.net/ There are some sticky wickets (specifically, exponential-time conflict resolution) that hindered its adoption.
Thankfully, there's Pijul, which is like Darcs but a) solves that problem; and b) is written in Rust! The perfect DVCS, probably! https://pijul.org/
Of course there is a room for improvement... One of the biggest issues is usability/user experience: pull, fetch, checkout, commit, push, rebase - what is all this and what is the exact meaning? I need simple English terms for my work - like update and save - nothing more. Why do I need to worry about implementation details and terms? If I can not explain it to my wife, then I can not use it for binary documents whic…
To be honest, I can’t even imagine what you imagine “git save” and “git update” would even do in an alternate universe.
it's just backup of current state with irrelevant commit message. Everything is described at the end of the work in PR's description and squash merged.
For a new versioning system we do not need twenty different choices. We need one free, open, and solid solution that everybody uses.
What the main leaders of the industry should really is to found a groupo that defines that standard. This would be their chance to really make the world a (slightly) better place.
Instead everyone switched to a "distributed" version control system that is such a pain in the ass it is all now hosted by a single company.
A lot of alternative tools come up because of people writing them being unwilling to learn git. There are a handful of concepts and a few handfuls of commands and thats it.
And once someone learns git throroughly, they usually come to see that it is actually good enough, and dont bother making something new.
Subversion was really good. It wasn't perfect, but it was relatively painless. Instead everyone switched to a "distributed" version control system that is such a pain in the ass it is all now hosted by a single company.
Subversion was really good. It wasn't perfect, but it was relatively painless. Instead everyone switched to a "distributed" version control system that is such a pain in the ass it is all now hosted by a single company.
My colleagues evaluated git and thought it was too complicated. A few years and a lot of employments later, they’re all using git. I don’t know if it was peer pressure from enough young recruits, but the verdict is clear: git is better than SVN.