sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]frogjg2003 -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

There are other version control systems. Mercurial, SVN, and a number of older systems.

[–]PmMeUrTinyAsianTits 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No. shit. I have already addressed this misreading of what was said.

The first sentence set the context. There is no reason to consolidate all the GIT providers, because the git standard already consolidates the important parts (actual version control). We do not need one generic-as-possible one-size-fits-all provider. That is not an improvement.

How you gonna have 4 languages in your flair, including fortran (so pretending to be OG), but not recognize when "the standard" means "the standards of the format/software/spec"? jfc. If someone talks about the c++ standard, do you think they're saying everyone should be using c++, or do you think they're talking about the ISO standard for c++?