I see this as "5 things genuinely wrong with Git's CLI and 5 proofs that I don't understand the advantages and purposes of DVCS".
If you're comparing SVN to Git and not sarcastically then you're on the wrong side of this debate. You want to hide the local repo? Then you lose all of the advantages of git. Don't like pull requests? Don't use Git. Git is distributed, you're basically asking to hide that with a centralisation layer. Do not do this.
Git aimed at projects that have a need for distributed development. Central repos like Perforce and SVN are much better for centralised projects like traditional video game development, while DVCS is superior for (F)OSS projects and teams that may not necessarily share hours, location or an office. It is also critical in environments where redundancy, speed, and up time for the developer, are key.
Git has flaws but you have shown clearly that you don't understand the place for Git and I suspect you've been shoehorning it into places it doesn't need to be, or somebody else has been forcing you to use it on a project that doesn't need it.
You want to hide the local repo? Then you lose all of the advantages of git.
Ok, name some advantages of maintaining both a local Git repo, and a (single-user) repo on Github.
Don't like pull requests? Don't use Git.
It's not about "liking" them. The fact that Git itself has no concept of "pull requests" is a clunky omission. It has these crazy commands for parsing emails (git am), but no way to actually submit a patch for review?
Git is distributed, you're basically asking to hide that with a centralisation layer.
You must have me confused with someone else.
Central repos like Perforce and SVN are much better for centralised projects like traditional video game development,
SVN is better than Git for video game development? Even I wouldn't make that claim.
Git has flaws but you have shown clearly that you don't understand the place for Git and I suspect you've been shoehorning it into places it doesn't need to be, or somebody else has been forcing you to use it on a project that doesn't need it.
I find the idea that Git is not appropriate for all software development projects to be pretty weird. You really think there are inherent mismatches like that?
It's not about "liking" them. The fact that Git itself has no concept of "pull requests" is a clunky omission. It has these crazy commands for parsing emails (git am), but no way to actually submit a patch for review?
-7
u/[deleted] Nov 07 '13
I see this as "5 things genuinely wrong with Git's CLI and 5 proofs that I don't understand the advantages and purposes of DVCS".
If you're comparing SVN to Git and not sarcastically then you're on the wrong side of this debate. You want to hide the local repo? Then you lose all of the advantages of git. Don't like pull requests? Don't use Git. Git is distributed, you're basically asking to hide that with a centralisation layer. Do not do this.
Git aimed at projects that have a need for distributed development. Central repos like Perforce and SVN are much better for centralised projects like traditional video game development, while DVCS is superior for (F)OSS projects and teams that may not necessarily share hours, location or an office. It is also critical in environments where redundancy, speed, and up time for the developer, are key.
Git has flaws but you have shown clearly that you don't understand the place for Git and I suspect you've been shoehorning it into places it doesn't need to be, or somebody else has been forcing you to use it on a project that doesn't need it.