It was not. It was literally a fork of perforce with executable renamed to sd.exe from p4. Command line was pretty much identical.
> git style of shit
I don't understand this phrase. Can you explain more?It's a generalisation, but, by and large, artists and designers don't enjoy using these sorts of tools. Also, they are more likely to be working with unmergeable files, something that git isn't really designed to work with.
(Programmers often don't like these sorts of tools either, but - again, a generalisation - they're harder to avoid if you're a programmer, so the average one is typically a bit more practised at putting up with this crap.)
I moved to Google from Microsoft and back when employee orientation involved going to Mountain View and going into labs to learn the basics, it was amusing to see fresh college hires confused at not-git while I sat down and said "It's Source Depot, I know this!"[1]
They might not be upset on the first few weeks but after a month or so they will be familiar with the pain.
> cried of happiness when we moved to git from SVN
You bring back some real memories with this phrase.I recall moving from RCS and CVS and thinking: "Oh, this is a real improvement." (Forgive me; I was young.)
Then, I moved from CVS to SVN and thought: "This is revolutionary. I can rename and merge." (Again, please withhold throwing your tomatoes until the end of the story!)
Later, projects grew large enough, that SVN became horrible because of how I/O worked on my PCs/networks (file by file, long before 1G network to developer PCs and horribly slow spinning disks).
The upgrade to Git was epic. Sure, the commands are weird and complex. More than 10 years later, I still need to lookup a command once a month, but it beats the pants off anything before. Hat tip to all the people (Hamano-san, et al) who have contributed to Git in the last 20 years. My life as a developer is so much better for it.
I was asking because I wonder what the enterprises that want to both use AI on their workflows like LLM's and have air-gap owned 100% data and pipelines are doing rn.
Feels like one of the few areas where to compete with big labs to me, might be wrong
What I hate about bitbucket is how stagnated it is.
A legacy tool might be bad, or it might be very good but just unpopular. A company that devotes political will to modernize for the sake of modernizing is the kind of craziness we get in the JS ecosystem.
I'm with you on the JS ecosystem - I work on crufty .NET desktop apps - but you couldn't pay me to work on my crufty .NET apps using SVN.
Credit where credit is due at my time at Excel we did improve things a lot (migration from Script# to TypeScript, migration from SourceDepot to git, shorter dev loop and better tooling etc) and a large chunk of development time was spent on developer tooling/happiness.
But it does suck to have to go to one of the old places and use sourcedepot and `osubmit` the "make a change" tool and then go over 16 popups in the "happy path" to submit your patch for review (also done in a weird windows gui review tool)
Git was quite the improvement :D
I can, if the version control software is just not up to standards.
I absolutely didn’t mind using mercurial/hg, even though I literally haven’t touched it until that point and knew nothing about it, because it is actually pretty good. I like it more than git now.
Git is a decent option that most people would be familiar with, cannot be upset about it either.
On another hand, Source Depot sucked badly, it felt like I had to fight against it the entire time. I wasn’t upset because it was unfamiliar to me. In fact, the more familiar I got with it, the more I disliked it.