git "too hard to use"?
Posted Feb 26, 2010 23:29 UTC (Fri) by ldo
In reply to: git "too hard to use"?
Parent article: Hg Init: a Mercurial tutorial
The people I am referring to are not 'software developers'. I mentioned documentation writers, testers, web designers, etc. They don't need and don't want to manage branches.
Yes they do. Since when do documentation writers not need to manage revisions to their documentation?
Yet, every git-pull is potentially a merge and git-rebase requires understanding of what commits are, the relation between hashes and commits, etc.
What are they doing using rebase? You should never use that on a branch that has been published for others to see.
From experience, the lock-modify-unlock model and Visual Source Safe specifically, is the best VCS for non-developers. They really really like that by default a file can be checked out and modified only by a single person.
Thats not how the real world works. Even with common-or-garden office documents, its common for them to be passed around to different people who will make comments and submit annotations, all of which have to be collated and reconciled together somehow. A distributed VCS merely formalizes the process. The more complex the documentation, the more important such formalization becomes.
Concepts of branches, tagging and merging are common to all modern version control systemstheres nothing specific to Git about any of them. Whats different about Git is the fact that your entire commit history is nothing but a DAG, and branches and tags are just pointers into that DAG.
to post comments)