I'm not so sure about that. I came from CVS / SVN, although I've fiddled
quite a bit with other scm's as well. The two-step commit process of git
didn't terrify me at all, and I had used git at least a month before I
joined the mailing-list and found out that there's this thing called an
"index". I knew about it before, since back then (June or July 2005)
there was only git-update-index to mark things to commit. I just didn't
worry about it but expected the scm to tell me if I was about to break
something horribly (which it often but not always did).
I think the main thing people are having difficulties with when it comes
to git is that it doesn't do things like other SCM's do it. Imo this is
a good thing, because it allows git to be more powerful than other
SCM's. Otoh it forces users migrating from
darcs/hg/monotone/perforce/whatever to git actually read the
documentation (and quite a lot of it), while hg -> bzr migrators use
pretty much the same commands for pretty much the same actions. This
makes users accustomed to not reading docs / trying things out before
attempting Real Work(tm), which breaks down horribly when user
expectations doesn't match reality. The simplest and usually most
effective solution is to meet the users half-way, and tell them early on
that this power comes at the cost of having to read the documentation
and do the tutorials.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
