Hacker News Reader

Gitless doesn't change anything about git's concepts, it just abstracts away some commands. So if you think this solves the problems, they're clearly not "conceptual" faults.

I think this is important because people are so quick to jump on the "git is bad" contrarian meme. Git is a fantastic piece of work and the CLI has a variety of issues. On top of this, git is conceptually unintuitive, so the CLI issues make for a worse experience.

View on HN

The other half of the issue is that git's commands don't follow the abstraction. If each command mapped to a single dag operation, it might make more sense. But they don't (revert).

They shouldn't. I'm not saying that Git doesn't have commands that can be hard to understand fully, but the whole point of any abstraction is to hide the "insides" of any operation so you don't have to think about them.

Having commands for each DAG operation will just add more complexity and expose a structure which you shouldn't be handling manually.

I think in order to really feel comfortable with Git you have reverse that and think about the DAG as the actual interface and the CLI as the clunky implementation you use to modify the DAG.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com