Why Git is Better Than HUH?
Git makes this process incredibly easy and it changes the way most developers work when they learn it. (looking at cheap, local branching)
Speaking of tools and workflows: this is why many developers express both love and hate for git-style branches; gits1 tend to enjoy them and argue that nobody else has them, which makes git great; everyone else says the feature is irrelevant for comparison because of the complexity of dealing with it.
The comment above seems to imply that git-style branches are desirable, but that doesn’t follow immediately: the added complexity comes from a particular workflow design, one that satisfied Torvalds and the Linux kernel team, but one that may seem unnatural to a lot of developers choosing between the two. Blank statements like this are dangerous as they imply that a certain workflow is superior, when clearly it is not: even git users prefer local clones instead of branching, because a folder on the fiesystem may be easier to grok for some.
It definitely isn’t a convincing argument for why git is better than anything, and it’s a clear attempt to ignore the fact that different tools work for different people (because of different workflows).
-
or gitters, though I like my way better… ↩
