41–50 of 142 posts
I was expecting this: http://tartley.com/?p=1267
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I used SVN for years without understanding it and that caused me to get weird merge errors I never managed to figure out. Git on the other hand I understood after a few weeks of using it. Since I failed to understand SVN after years of use I would say it is more complex.
> Hg folks should read this section carefully. Among various crazy notions Hg has is one that encodes the branch name within the commit object in some way. Unfortunately, Hg's vaunted "ease of use" (a.k.a "we support Windows better than git", which in an ideal world would be a negative, but in this world sadly it is not) has caused enormous takeup, and dozens of otherwise excellent developers have been brain-washed into thinking that is the only/right way.
If this is one of the most important concepts, starting it off with a slew of negativity about things the reader may be currently using (windows, hg) is probably not the best way to get them to keep reading.
I love Git, but I'm pretty sure there's no way to explain it simply.
Once you understand you're not going to pick it all up in an afternoon (just like a language) and that there will be lots more to learn down the road (like a language), git feels great.
I prefer the Fox News tutorial on the subject. 'Repo' means 'reciprocity' or 'reposotory' if you didn't know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious: did you use branches and labels in SVN? I've come across many svn repositories that don't use the trunk/branches/tags layout, and as a result the developers keep completely separate repositories for slightly different versions of their projects instead of creating branches. I've even seen new repositories created for each release version of the project. If you're using svn you need to understand the impl…
The problem is that with SVN, you can get in gradually. To start, the branchless approach still gets you a great service - obviously an incomplete one, but better than not having source control at all. And you can have leaders who are the only people who have to think about branching and merging and have people very gradually move into that role. Git seems to force you to dive straight into the deep-end, since everyt…
Gitolite (where this is hosted) is actually pretty cool too. For those who don't know what gitolite is, it is software to works in tandem with git-daemon, that basically allows you to run a centralized git sever with access rules. I created a screencast about it @ http://sysadmincasts.com/episodes/11-internal-git-server-wit...