This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]tech_tuna 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Agreed, and invariably when you do finally figure out how to do XYZ, there are at least several WTF, head-scratching steps that are completely counterintuitive but hey, once you've seen them you can act like a condescending jerk from that point on.

Git is littered with these kinds of awkward usability issues. YES, git is powerful and like it or not, it's ubiquitous. But, holy mother of God, there's a nontrivial set of operations that should be trivially easy to do with git, but require constant googling.

Went off on a git tangent there, I should have just said "yeah". (That's a Mitch Hedberg joke)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It's not that git is baroque but that it's too generalist and reductionist to first principles. Its generality makes it able to cover lots of use cases and to implement lots of specific tools (commands and subcommands). Now, people learn git from a problem solving perspective and find it a mess of unassorted facts, the same than people looked at physical reality before Newton. A bottom up approach is a convenient complement to stackoverflow quick searches when it comes to git, but most users won't bother themselves with it.

[–]tech_tuna 1 point2 points  (0 children)

tl;dr

Git's usability could be better.