[leonheld]

Sadly my only experience with Pijul was this https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/issues/151.

When one of the key guys behind the VCS says things like "especially when the alternative is something as broken as Git" about other control systems I really don't feel like using said tool.

[gavinhoward]

I can see your point.

This is a good reminder to me that I need to control my tongue as well; I have said things like the Pijul author did in that thread, and I need to do better.

[kstrauser]

That’s a classy reply.

[kstrauser]

I can’t still edit that comment to explain, but I meant it sincerely. When someone sees a foible of their own in others and moves to correct it, that’s awesome and commendable.

[gavinhoward]

Yeah, I don't know why you were downvoted. I upvoted you because I was sure you were replying to me sincerely.

[kstrauser]

Eh, you never can tell. I assume someone thought I was being sarcastic. I don't care if someone downvotes me, but I'd hope it'd be because I'd genuinely said something dumb or unkind.

[nmz]

Linus called cvs/subversion broken, did you stop using git?

[leonheld]

I was like 4 years old when git was released, so I'm unaware of any of this. Sorry.

[nmz]

Well he didn't really call cvs/subversion broken, to semi quote, he basically said that subversion people were trying to improve on cvs and you cannot do that because cvs is inherently broken.

Its not damning to call something broken, plenty of software has bugs that make it unusable and are broken to many people. In fact, many tools have been made in anger at other tools not doing what you want them to do. This is just the software inception cycle. You should be allowed to be angry at the brokenness of software... its what allows improvement.