So, the protocol is definitely good enough to handle situations like this but just commonly applied that way esp with many Github-hosted projects. Gotcha. That makes sense.
Git is very flexible and does not even require repo-to-repo communication over the wire at all; patches can be emailed among contributors and then committed and tracked locally. Branching and merging is so fast and easy in git that every participant can have a slightly different repo for a given project, incorporating shared changes as they see fit.
Github is popular because it is opinionated--it chooses to use git in certain ways, thus reducing the complexity for people who aren't git experts (i.e. most people).
The most sophisticated users of git--the Linux and git projects, probably--do not rely on github at all. As far as I know, they share code via emailed patches. Some of those developers might not even be using git at all! They just send patches upstream, and the upstream developer checks the patches into their local git repo and then preps a larger patch to be emailed farther upstream.
That's pretty wild. Sounds like main program/protocol is very true to the UNIX philosophy of tooling. My early reads on it suggested that gave it both it's power/versatility and horrific UI consequences for beginners. An opinionated UI and host like Github is a natural consequence.
I remember thinking in my early reading that git was like an assembly language for build systems. It really needed a front-end of some kind to smooth things over for new and casual users. Maybe not as heavyweight as Github but better than the main program. Can keep the low-level stuff in for advanced users.
Was that or is that still a common assessment or was my initial impression off?
Github (which provides a desktop app in addition to their website) is by far the most successful one, I think because they define a whole simplifed and social experience, not just a client.
To me it seems like people seem to segment into two camps: those who want to do the basics (they tend to use GitHub), and those who want to use the full power of git (they tend to use the CLI).
Github is popular because it is opinionated--it chooses to use git in certain ways, thus reducing the complexity for people who aren't git experts (i.e. most people).
The most sophisticated users of git--the Linux and git projects, probably--do not rely on github at all. As far as I know, they share code via emailed patches. Some of those developers might not even be using git at all! They just send patches upstream, and the upstream developer checks the patches into their local git repo and then preps a larger patch to be emailed farther upstream.