| >Instead of having a million developers adapt to git, git should adapt to the million developers and free up their time for doing something that actually matters to a user. How should git adapt?
Can you get a simpler model than this?
Is really a basic structure like a tree so complicated millions of developers are having a hard time with it? Nobody is advocating for "dont use new stuff, old is betteer". Nobody is advocating for people to hand-check compiler outputs (unless your analogy pertains to people who work in a GUI tool that shows them pretty pictures for opcodes and they check if the pictures match). You've missed the point. The point is "try to understand the basics of the tool you are using". If me wanting people to learn and understand more makes me an asshole, so be it. I'd rather be an asshole and help people learn more and understand more than coddle them in the safety of the pretty buttons and say "it's ok, you don't have to understand". If we don't understand our tools and the problems they solve, how will we make progress? How will we make better tools? How will we make better software? How do you learn and grow if not by understanding what you don't? |
That you can't tell the difference between "let's make software more usable" and "nobody should learn anything ever again and just soften into blobs of undifferentiated protoplasm" seems like a you problem.