3 fucking years already that I introduced fucking git in this company and people still fail to grasp the fucking basics... Wtf?

If you push a fucking change wait for the fucking message ... If a fucking fail message appears telling you to pull before pushing to remote, just don't ignore it... Wtf... I can tell it is the case just by looking at the message template, I don't even need to read the motherfucker...

And its not that they are stupid, those are smart motherfuckers we are talking about...

training session time! with exam! 🤓

If you don't want to be the support guy for tools with extremely bad UI, then don't introduce them.

Maybe try using GitKraken or some other Git app with graphical interface

gitkraken is awesome 😍

You are lucky that you have version control. In my current project (with an Indian outsourcing co), they don't even have version control.

@lambdaCurry we used to use it but ditched because of some nasty bugs

@Fast-Nop I don't think its ui is bad. It just a matter of trying to get past the basics...

@irene 😂😂 probably

@hell it's one of the worst UIs in existence.

Actually, that's a good idea - anyone who likes to introduce Git is appointed as troubleshooter. On top of his regular projects, of course. Maybe that gets people thinking before they inflict such stuff on others.

@hell fair enough. I’m not a fan myself either but it might be helpful for some

@Fast-Nop why do you think it is so horrible?

@hell because the UI is inconsistent and the commands haphazard. The whole thing is an error-prone overkill unless you have a project like the Linux kernel with more than a thousand devs world wide.

Why is Github so popular? A centralised repo that is not open source? Because Git's UI sucks donkeys and Github gets around it.

Version control is just a helper tool and should not require any amount of thought, let alone make a science out of something that ought to be dang simple to use.

Trying to get my fellow DBAs to use git for for DDL. It makes things so much easier to mange and update everytime a Dev wants a change. And we rarely have conflicts, because we only allow one person to touch the script at a time. We use Bit Bucket.

@Hubot-0x58 Professionally SVN via TortoiseSVN. No problems even when I havn't been using it for a few weeks. Also, the only implementation detail spilling out is directories, and that's not an issue because file explorers are common knowledge.

However, SVN will fail with a dev team setup like the Linux kernel, that's clear.

@Fast-Nop you basically said "its bad because its bad"

@hell commands where the options lead to the command doing VERY different things are bad.

Exposing implementation details to the user is generally bad design, especially when the consequence is that the user has to understand the underlying application design in order to use it. You don't have to be a car engineer in order to drive because the inner workings are abstracted away, something that Git fails to do.

http://jordi.inversethought.com/blo...

https://redfin.engineering/two-comm...

Actually, the history how that came together is a bunch of anti-patterns.

1) Torvalds had used BitKeeper although it wasn't free software. Stallman's warnings had been ignored because he was being "ideological". Torvalds was "pragmatic", which was his term for refusing to think and acting stupid.

2) All of a sudden, the "nasty surprise" with BitKeeper came, and then an alternative solution was needed quickly.

3) The whole thing was "designed" as needs came along, and everyone knows that this approach leads to an awful crossover between rabid prototyping and protoduction.

4) Whenever something new was needed, it was just slapped somewhere, and the command or option name stuck, even if it was more or less duplicated functionality. Reworking that later was out of question because of backwards compatibility.

Conclusion: if you ignore all best practices and throw shit together quickly, the result will suck. Who would have thought this?

@Fast-Nop some commands are misleading, sure. But preaching svn over git, for god sakes man...
That's like saying "my carriage is better than your car because it looks better".

@Commodore that's hogwash. There is one case where Git is clearly superior over SVN, and that's a team setup as in the Linux kernel. A large amount of devs world wide on the same project is just impossible with SVN. But even that isn't an argument for Git, it's a use case for a DVCS. Otherwise, the KISS principle just wins because it's more productive.

@Fast-Nop well speaking of kiss, i find that learning a command line is stupid simple. The complexity is linear and mostly revolves around your ability to read.
On the other hand, keeping a clean commit history, properly organising code reviews, deploying automatically and efficiently, are rather complex problems.

I'd rather have a tool that helps me fix complex problems

@Commodore the command line of Git isn't simple to learn, see my previous postings, not least because Git fails to abstract its inner workings.

Git is so bad in this that many open source devs flock to a non open source platform and accept the abuse of a DVCS for a centralised platform, just to escape the shitty UI.

With SVN, I don't have issues with any of the aspects you mentioned. Versioning is a simple task, and if you need to learn complicated stuff for that, something is dead wrong here.

Is there an offline git client like GitKraken? I have no intention to manage yet another login for something I'll be using offline/on LAN...

Fucking spyware everywhere...

@irene I know that... I meant a GUI for it, like the aforementioned GitKraken. I just don't get why you have to login on app start...

@irene Thanks, looks good. On Windows, I use TortoiseGit, but I needed something similar for Linux.

Does it, by chance, integrate with Sublime Text?