Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Oliver Kullmann (O.Kullmann_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-20 08:50:01

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 09:30:18PM +0900, Julien Nitard wrote:
> I can't believe you said that:
> 
> … Git is so easy to learn and use ...
> 
> Some stats first:
> Stackoverflow.com
>  - git 14000 questions
>  - svn 11000 questions
> 
> If you consider the ratio (question / market share), git is a clear loser.
>

Intuitively, the above is quite clear to me: Git is the future, so
many people explore it, want to know about it. Svn is the past, not
of so much interest anymore.
And Git is also more powerful than Svn (I think that's undisputable), so
there are bound to be more question (e.g., there should be more questions
on C++ than on C).

One could make an empirical study ... (not me).
 
> Even the people pushing for git on this ML tend to agree that it is not the
> simplest in terms of usage.
> 

I don't think that this was said: the task *is complex*, that's the point!
Git is appropriate to the task, and thus it must be complex.
The basic usage is unquestionable simple (using simple tools like
git-gui and gitk), and then comes the rest --- and who wants power has
first to practice.

If Boost would provide good recommendations (best practice) for the common
(Boost!) workflows, that would definitely be of great help, and I think
that would sort out most of the problems.

Oliver

-- 
Dr. Oliver Kullmann
Department of Computer Science
College of Science, Swansea University
Faraday Building, Singleton Park
Swansea SA2 8PP, UK
http://cs.swan.ac.uk/~csoliver/