[pmeunier]

No, it's actually related to the ease of use and correctness. By design, Git lacks two fundamental properties that would make working with repositories much easier:

1. Git merge is not associative. This results in cases where Alice and Bob work together, Bob pulls Alice's work, and her lines get merged into places she's never seen (blocks of text newly introduced by Bob).

2. More importantly, Git is not commutative. This means that cherry-picking and rebasing are complex operations that change commits' ids. This forces Git users to branch (an extra step that needs to be done before starting to write), but more painfully, it sometimes forces them to do multiple steps of rebasing before being able to merge what they want, or to solve the same conflict again and again after an unlucky cherry-picking.

Of course, all this could maybe be prevented by stricter planning and a more vertical organisation. But this is not how many people write code in 2019. Continuous delivery, for instance, means that teams no longer know long in advance what they are going to over the course of the project. Also, the best developers don't work in vertical teams where they get continuously told what to work on.