#2 posted by necros
on 2013/07/13 01:32:35
haha, i'll join in. it was pretty rough to get started using it.
#3 posted by gb on 2013/07/13 01:46:24
svn was comparatively user friendly. I also found merging / resolving conflicts easier with svn. Then again, git gives you a perfect excuse to require people to send you merge requests, instead of having to give them full svn access. :-^
I don't care much one way or the other though I agree that git's documentation is lacking and written by uber-nerds.
People already have problems setting up svn :-s I can't imagine git being easier for the average guy.
#4 posted by qbism
on 2013/07/13 02:16:32
tortoisegit makes it much easier than, say, git-scm. It's almost like svn. But I only use it to follow a couple projects on github.
#5 posted by Joel B
on 2013/07/13 03:22:29
Git does have an arcane set of primitives and horrible command-line syntax and docs, but if you're working on OS X I can highly recommend the free SourceTree application as a good GUI layer on top of git. It does still really help to understand the git primitives, but you don't have to fight them... I use it for my professional development work and it makes me happy. It is super-slick, especially when using it with an external diff/merge application like FileMerge.
(I would imagine there are similar GUI solutions for other OSs...)
I Just Have Less Problems Now
with SVN I regularly had trouble with corrupted repositories. Git doesn't produce such errors. I also enjoy the possibility of having a couple local commits which I can then push as a whole to the server. I also use a lot of local branches for new features etc, which is much easier and faster to do with git.
explains pretty well how you can use git and its "arcane syntax" to your advantage. Before I read that, I was using git as a mere replacement for svn, but now I can use git's superior model to my advantage.
#7 posted by Spiney
on 2013/07/13 13:23:05
Heard git is supposed to be a pita with media heavy projects. It's supposedly 'better' but I can't figure it out for the life of me. But I'm just an idiot artist so what do I know.
#8 posted by megaman
on 2013/07/13 19:57:30
just use mercurial. All the pros, none of the cons :-)
How Is Mercurial Different From Git?
I Just Have Less Problems Now
Actually, i'm quite happy Git is such a technological success. I just had to let off some steam after having a tough time with some project i'm associated with.
Here's a snippet from an interview i'd missed. Linus is prett good value :)
Git has taken over where Linux left off separating the geeks into know-nothings and know-it-alls. I didn�t really expect anyone to use it because it�s so hard to use, but that turns out to be its big appeal. No technology can ever be too arcane or complicated for the black t-shirt crowd.
That link may be a mock-up. O: I can't tell.
Maybe Mercurial Is Better
It has almost the same feature set as Git, but is supposedly easier to use.
And yeah, it is a bit too hard to use. I also had a hard time when I started to accept patches / pull requests and whatnot for TB. The workflow is great, but the way it is supported by the git tools is lacking. On the other hand, if you are using github and a good graphical client such as Tower for OS X, many things become easier.
#13 posted by gb on 2013/07/14 11:09:21
That link says "satire". It's well done though because it could be true. A coffee shop in Portland, Oregon? Come on.
I proudly own a black T-Shirt, btw.
If You Like Svn You're Stupid And Ugly
#14 posted by jt_
on 2013/07/14 14:46:18
My (secret) thoughts exactly :-P
#17 posted by szo on 2013/07/16 07:43:05
Oh boy, this one made my day :)
#18 posted by qbism
on 2013/07/16 16:20:45
Github feels like a cool site to be on, streamlined, social, hip. Possibly has a lot to do with the spread of git. I've got svn on sourceforge and that site feels klunky by comparison. It also undercounts downloads, which is not what a small project needs. Both sites drive me nuts because you can't sort by the date column when browsing code.