[bspammer]

The irony with git is that the underlying data model is far simpler than the user interface implies. People assume git is complicated because the user interface is complicated, but it really is very simple under the hood.

So much so that you can write your own basic version of git in a couple of hours: https://wyag.thb.lt/

[vasergen]

Thanks for the link, really interesting

[SAI_Peregrinus]

The problem is that git leaks the underlying data model all over the place, even where it's unnecessary to actually controlling versions. It's a nice data model, but the user view shouldn't expose it. The data model is an implementation detail, but git treats it like a show & tell.

[sofal]

You have it exactly backwards, and I think it gets to the core of why people get so unnecessarily confused about git. The underlying data model is both much simpler than the interface and crucial to understand. If you treat git as a collection of memorized command recipes the same way you did with SVN or CVS, you're going to have a bad time. The underlying DAG needs to be top of mind when interacting with git, as it best represents the inherent complexity of the problem that code repositories are meant to solve.

[lanstin]

But this isn’t a problem because the underlying data model is almost perfect for version control of text files. In some cases the data model is an implementation detail but in this case the porcelain is the fungible detail that can change depending on surface things like people's preferences.