On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 08:38:19AM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote:
True, but I still think that having git put its thoughts into tables is
actually not helpful.
i'm not convinced that the proposed feature specifically would have
helped me, either (i found the index a rather obvious concept once i
knew that it's there), but i'm making a general argument here. so:
To be precise, it actually might be helpful, but only to the first
category of users, who will never reach it. I mean, never say never,
but in this case I'm pretty sure it's safe to say it.
well, and i think that you're wrong about that.
your categorization is simply wrong, because it assumes an incorrect
static model.
while for the last decade i've been as much of a git expert as one can
reasonably be without being literally obsessed with it or having written
much of it, i absolutely *did* start out in your first category (as in,
it was forced upon me, while i couldn't have cared less about the
specifics - p4 was working well enough (or so i thought)). and i hated
this stupid git (it was 2009, and it was much more of a pita for noobs
than it is now). i certainly could have used more sensible
visualizations at every step - on the command line, because that's where
i mostly "live".
the second major error in the thinking is that "expert" and "gui user"
are mutually exclusive categories. while i do most things on the command
line, i would never voluntarily use "add -p" - why should i inflict that
pain upon me, when i can simply use git-gui to do the job in a much more
visual and freely navigable way? the same goes for "log --graph" vs.
gitk, and git's "blame" function vs. qt creator's (or git-gui's, but i
don't use it for that).
regards
