"Daniel Gibson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Am 21.05.2011 00:15, schrieb Nick Sabalausky: >> "Daniel Gibson" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected]... >>> Am 20.05.2011 22:26, schrieb Nick Sabalausky: >>>> "Don" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>>> news:[email protected]... >>>>> >>>>> Here's my list of bugs in git for windows which I found in the first >>>>> fews >>>>> days of using it: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Windows git's handling of paths is completely screwed. >>>>> If you've checked out your working copy into (say) c:\foo\bar\dmd >>>>> and you rename a parent directory, eg to c:\foo2\bar\dmd, your working >>>>> copy gets hosed. >>>>> Maybe this happens only after you've performed a git operation; didn't >>>>> experiment with it much. >>>> >>>> That one's kind of funny, actually. Linus himself pretty much considers >>>> SVN >>>> to be total shit, and yet SVN handles that perfectly fine, while his >>>> program >>>> apperently doesn't. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> You wouldn't really expect that Linus cares about Windows support, would >>> you? I guess on Linux git works really well (haven't used it much yet). >>> >>> Microsofts VCS (Visual Sourcesafe or something like that) won't work >>> properly on Linux either.. >> >> Microsoft is a corporation. So by definition, self-interested (Besides, >> VSS >> is rightfully dead anyway). Linus isn't a corporation and he isn't >> selling >> Linux. But he is, presumably, a self-respecting software developer and >> not a >> self-righteous ass that's out to throw his weight around at any whim (or >> is >> he?). So why not? >> > > Yeah, Linus is not a corporation, he doesn't get paid to develop git, so > why should he spend his precious time for Windows support that he (and > his targeted userbase, i.e. Linux kernel developers) doesn't need?
Because it makes it a better product and, presumably, he cares about his software being good. And like I said, *I* make damn sure my software is sensibly cross-platform, and of all the things I bitch about, sensibly supporting another major OS has never been one of them. And the fact that I didn't write Windows doesn't invalidate the comparison: If I wrote OSS program A that was an alternative to program B, and then I wrote OSS program X that interacted with program A, you can be damn sure I'd be interested in X being compatible with B, too.
