[yes_or_gnome]

The SVN and P4 articles exists (just google for "svn mistakes" and "perforce p4 mistakes"), but either 1. nobody is sharing them to HN or 2. they do and nobody cares to vote them up.

Unrelated topic (falling cats), same logical fallacy: http://www.radiolab.org/story/102525-vertigo/ (Starting around 14:20)

[compiler-guy]

“Nobody submits them, or nobody cares to vote them up.”

That should tell you something: these articles don’t resonate with the crowd. That should tell you something.

[yes_or_gnome]

I take your original comment as an indictment that git is somehow broken by design. Which sure, you're entitled to an opinion, but to bring up SVN in the same breath is absurd.

That's why I replied.

I can't really address p4 because I haven't used it for any real world use cases. Only to prepare for an interview. With that limited use, I can't come with any reason to think it's superior.

[compiler-guy]

You take my original comment incorrectly. I said nothing about how git is designed and how it may be broken. I made no claims about how Perforce may or may not be superior. I made no claim as to how SVN may or may not be superior.

I made exactly one claim:

These git cheatsheets on how to get out of a bad state get a lot of traction on Hacker News. That is a pretty good indicator of something. Let's think about what that is. The fact that you consider it a serious indictment of git should also tell you something.

I'll make another claim now though:

When someone criticizes git, some users sure get defensive about it. That should also tell you something.

[yes_or_gnome]

You're a looney.