Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Git concepts simplified

gitolite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: Git concepts simplified

#21

Post by tootie »

angdis wrote: post #10
tootie wrote: post #8

There is an inverse relationship the number articles title "x explained simply" and the actual simplicity of x. I honestly don't understand why the developer community refuses to admit the obvious that git is unholy clusterfuck of a product. It has a nice data structure inside it? Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used.

I think part of the problem is that git, like other version control systems, does not enforce any particular way of working (workflow). When authors try to explain how to use git, they often have a very particular workflow in mind and don't necessarily describe exactly what that workflow is. This can cause major problems when somebody tries to apply advice to their own workflow. I like the graphical approach. It help…

That's not it. Following any reasonable workflow still requires a set of arcane commands and flags that only make the slightest bit of sense if you know how git is implemented. I was able to use SVN successfully without ever knowing a thing about the implementation. I've generally had the same experience with HG and even CVS and VSS back in the day. Git adds sophistication over a prodcut like SVN, but adds vastly more complexity.

Re: Git concepts simplified

#24

Post by piratebroadcast »

jlgreco wrote: post #12
tootie wrote: post #8

There is an inverse relationship the number articles title "x explained simply" and the actual simplicity of x. I honestly don't understand why the developer community refuses to admit the obvious that git is unholy clusterfuck of a product. It has a nice data structure inside it? Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used.

> Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used. Unix. You are operating primarily on a tree of files and streams of text. To operate on these you have a wide array of utilities that perform simple tasks (and a handful that perform complex tasks as well) that, when composed, allow you to perform any transformation you want. You can get a freshman CS student off t…

Git and Linux were both invented by Linus Torvalds.

Re: Git concepts simplified

#25

Post by jlgreco »

piratebroadcast wrote: post #24
jlgreco wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used. Unix. You are operating primarily on a tree of files and streams of text. To operate on these you have a wide array of utilities that perform simple tasks (and a handful that perform complex tasks as well) that, when composed, allow you to perform any transformation you want. You can get a freshman CS student off t…

Git and Linux were both invented by Linus Torvalds.

Linus just created a kernel that can be used with a Unix-like system. The difference here isn't academic, what I am talking about above was created before Linus was born. (mildly interestingly, he apparently missed Unix Epoch by only a few days)

Re: Git concepts simplified

#26

Post by pjmlp »

jlgreco wrote: post #12
tootie wrote: post #8

There is an inverse relationship the number articles title "x explained simply" and the actual simplicity of x. I honestly don't understand why the developer community refuses to admit the obvious that git is unholy clusterfuck of a product. It has a nice data structure inside it? Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used.

> Name another end-user product for which you are even vaguely aware of what data structures were used. Unix. You are operating primarily on a tree of files and streams of text. To operate on these you have a wide array of utilities that perform simple tasks (and a handful that perform complex tasks as well) that, when composed, allow you to perform any transformation you want. You can get a freshman CS student off t…

Except there isn't a single version of UNIX, each flavour has its own deviations.

Re: Git concepts simplified

#27

Post by dasil003 »

tootie wrote: post #21
angdis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of the problem is that git, like other version control systems, does not enforce any particular way of working (workflow). When authors try to explain how to use git, they often have a very particular workflow in mind and don't necessarily describe exactly what that workflow is. This can cause major problems when somebody tries to apply advice to their own workflow. I like the graphical approach. It help…

That's not it. Following any reasonable workflow still requires a set of arcane commands and flags that only make the slightest bit of sense if you know how git is implemented. I was able to use SVN successfully without ever knowing a thing about the implementation. I've generally had the same experience with HG and even CVS and VSS back in the day. Git adds sophistication over a prodcut like SVN, but adds vastly mor…

Conversely, SVNs data model remained opaque after years of daily use simply because it solves the problem at hand poorly and is not defined very well.

Re: Git concepts simplified

#28

Post by gbog »

Nice. I'd love to see more details about the index, the way to see differences between branches with log and diff, and I think stash should be mentioned.

Re: Git concepts simplified

#30

Post by volaski »

jlgreco wrote: post #11
dcre wrote: post #2

I love Git, but I'm pretty sure there's no way to explain it simply.

I don't get this attitude. The DAG is exceedingly simple and I think can be taught reasonably in only a few minutes. From there you really only need to teach a very minor amount of the UI, and teach the user how to perform "I want to do this to the DAG" => "This is what I type" translations on their own. I've seen all of this done well in sub-hour presentations. Mercurial on the other hand has a pain in the ass datam…

Git is simpler than any other VCS, but VCS itself is not simple concept to understand. That's what he's saying, and I agree. I use git all the time, but it's not easy to understand the whole version control thing as a beginner. Also Git is not just about DAG, you need to be able to understand the decentralized nature, etc. In that sense, some people may find SVN easier to understand.
Post reply on HN