Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Apr 19, 2007, 12:33 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704191428360.8822@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <1176984945.30690.30.camel@cauchy.softax.local>

Hi,

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Marcin Kasperski wrote:

[BTW: who said the following? You skipped that information.]

> > So I don't think it's even true that new people should be pointed at cg 
> > any more.
> 
> Google points to git.or.cz ;-)

How does Google point to something? You mean the last time you ran the search, the top find _for you_ was git.or.cz?

Show 10 quoted lines

> > But compare setting up a git repository with setting up a CVS 
> > repository. With git, it's literally "git init", and you're done. No 
> > need to worry about CVSROOT issues etc. Everything is self-contained. 
> > CVS is *hard* to get into, by comparison.
> 
> I am in no way advocating CVS, but to be fair in such comparison, one
> should mention also effort of *publishing* git repository and making it
> available to remote clients. Initialized and configured CVS (or
> subversion, or perforce, or ...) repo is something ready to be used by
> remote clients.

No. Not at all. It took me _one day_ to publish my first CVS repository. It took me exactly 10 seconds to do that with Git.

If you are referring to readily-usable CVS services like sourceforge's, you are comparing apples with sentences.

> Getting correct ssh keys in correct places is - for instance -
> noticeable problem for many people. Especially if they use clients
> (like plink) which natively use alternative key save format. Etc...

I fail to see how you need ssh keys in order to publish a Git repository.

> I agree that git introduces plenty of excellent concepts. What it needs
> is better docs (also, clearly known **SINGLE** master doc, just sth like
> subversion book),

Does that mean you are volunteering?

> cleaned command line interface (I feel that there are
> just too many lowlevel commands visible for beginning user, maybe at
> least one could split them into git-* for mere mortals and gitadm-* for
> repository hackers),

Does that mean we can expect patches from you?

> portability,

Which platform are you having in mind?

> and finally GUI.

Does that mean you will provide patches? A good starting point is git-gui, IMHO.

Ciao, Dscho