On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 12:08:22PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > On 9/2/2014 09:00, Dömötör Gulyás wrote: > > > >This is the main issue I have: git does not follow the principle of > >least surprise. I'm sure it *can* do everything, if you know all of > >the switches and gotchas. But you don't, even if you think you do. > >Apparently many advanced git users have their subset well figured out, > >and those never can understand outsiders complaining about how > >difficult git can be. > > Git solves the Linux kernel problem, and it solves it well. The > thing is, Linus Torvalds is unique. No one else on the planet has a > problem that big and complex to solve. Why is everyone trying to > use a tool designed to serve his requirements?
While I agree on the uniqueness of Torvalds, I don't agree with the rest. The Linux kernel is *not* that big when compared with many other projects. There are quite a few other projects that are comparable in size and history. There is something else which is often ignored, especially by git advocats. The development model pushed by git is the development model used by Torvalds and that's pretty unique as well. In a way, it inverts the normal process used by most projects. A somewhat sarcastic view would call it organised distrust. Most FOSS projects and many commercial projects have a moderately flat hierachy. Members have work areas they commit code in, releases and contributions outside that area is handled either by senior members or other special subteams. There rarely is a single point of failure / approval... The Linux model effectively inverts that model. Joerg _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
