[thewebcount]

> The problem with how people use Git, I’m suggesting, is that their analogical or metaphorical conception of Git doesn’t work — it doesn’t fit the way Git actually behaves — if, indeed, the conception exists at all.

No, the problem is not with "how people use Git". The problem is with git. We've known for years how to make clear, concise interfaces that help people understand what's going to happen. Git does not have a clear, concise interface. That is its biggest problem and will continue to be until it is changed to have a clear, concise interface.

[squaresmile]

Fwiw, I'm not sure if it's recent or not but git CLI has pretty good suggestion of what commands to run next. git status gives a decent amount of info. It also suggests the newer commands like switch or restore.

[jatone]

then feel free to build that tool on top of git. nothing is stopping you, given the existence of such tools today.

[cerved]

git has a very clear, concise and stable interface if you understand how git works. it's designed this way, intentionally. people should stop complaining about it and either learn how to use it, switch to another tool or just write their own interface

[recursive]

It's not possible to switch to another tool unless you only ever work on code that you wrote, and never need to collaborate with anyone else.

[cerved]

No it's totally possible to use your own VCS and sync changes to another VCS. I don't know which tool you'd prefer but I used a git repository for my own work and synched it to a TFVC repository until my company switched to git. It sucked, because TFVC sucks but it's totally doable

[jatone]

no, its absolutely possible, as demonstrated by the numerous repositories that switched from cvs and svn to git. what you describe is a lack of desire to switch to another tool by your coworkers because you've been unable to make an adequate case for doing so.