Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument

From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@imag.fr>
Date: Apr 18, 2007, 17:43 UTC
Message-ID: <vpqejmhy3x2.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <17958.19499.813637.324723@lisa.zopyra.com>

Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 09:07:55 (-0700) Linus Torvalds writes:
>>...
>>Actually, at this stage, I really think cogito just *complicates* git 
>>usage. ...
>
> As a relative newbie to git, I agree.  At our company, we did not even
> seriously consider using cogito.  Just easier to jump right in to the
> frosty waters.

Same for me.

As a beginner, I went to http://git.or.cz/, clicked "crash courses", and since I didn't find "git from scratch", I clicked "git for CVS users" (I know CVS, but haven't used it for a long time, I'm mostly a bzr user converted from GNU Arch).

There, the commands are not "git something", but "cg something". Well, not always, at least. Indeed, there's still a "git blame", a reference to "git-rev-parse manpage".

Then, I can't even find it in the tutorial, but somewhere, it should be mentionned to say who I am in ~/.gitconfig.

So, Cogito can not be seen as "a revision control, using git as a back-end". It's definitely an additional layer, not hiding all of git.

And then, comming to the mailing list, and looking at other websites, I can see git commands here and there. I started to manage branches using cogito, tried git commands related to branches, and realized that they used a totally different interface.

So, cogito has probably been of a real use at the beginning, where git was said to be almost unuseable without anything else (I didn't try git at that time), but I don't think it's the case anymore.

-- 
Matthieu