Git 2.37 Released With Sparse Index Feature Now Ready For Widespread Use

[skierpage]

Git has confusing things such has head, detatched head, and many other confusing things. If you get merge conflict, you're fucked.
Git has a GUI tool called gitk which sucks, it is written in Tk and looks like it from 1980.

Git is a power tool that exposes the fundamental complexity of disributed version control and revision states. These things are just hard, so git is hard, and you can wind up in confusing hell. But git has never ever lost a change I made.

[bug77]

Renaming, moving and splitting files works perfectly well with SVN though. You absolutely must do it via SVN though, and not via the file system, else SVN will have no clue about what you just did. So user friendly

Oh yeah, that. I've never met a single soul that moved files with a svn command. Track by content seems like a no-brainer, by comparison.

[MauganRa]

If you get merge conflict, you're fucked.

Merge conflicts are a fact of life. They are bound to happen since people sometimes step on each other's shoes when doing things. With some practice and a good GUI, they are perfectly fine to handle. Also, show us a VCS that makes them easier to handle.

Git has a GUI tool called gitk which sucks, it is written in Tk and looks like it from 1980.

There are dozens of Git GUI clients to choose from: https://www.git-scm.com/downloads/guis/ . It would be a waste of time for the Git maintainers to compete with them.

[MauganRa]

Yes, other VCSes are still around, but really, until Git, they didn't even track files properly (e.g. rename a file in svn, watch your commit history disappear). And I've almost forgot about the days I had to track down which team member locked the svn file I needed to check in. They're still around, but they're now relegated to the niches they deserve.

Renaming, moving and splitting files works perfectly well with SVN though. You absolutely must do it via SVN though, and not via the file system, else SVN will have no clue about what you just did. So user friendly

[tildearrow]

The Git CLI is inconsistent, example to list things such as tags, commit history, branches, remotes, etc it uses different options to do it, sometimes it is --list, other times not.

Sometimes it expects syntax like "git://example.com/repo", sometimes "example.com:repo" (colon), sometimes "example.com repo" (space) sometimes "example/repo" (slash).

Git has confusing things such has head, detatched head, and many other confusing things. If you get merge conflict, you're fucked.
Git has a GUI tool called gitk which sucks, it is written in Tk and looks like it from 1980.

Think of "head" as in the thing that contains the needle which plays a record.

Merge conflict does not mean exactly that. You get the opportunity to edit out the changes (Git even nicely points out the differences).

[bug77]

The Git CLI is inconsistent, example to list things such as tags, commit history, branches, remotes, etc it uses different options to do it, sometimes it is --list, other times not.

Sometimes it expects syntax like "git://example.com/repo", sometimes "example.com:repo" (colon), sometimes "example.com repo" (space) sometimes "example/repo" (slash).

Git has confusing things such has head, detatched head, and many other confusing things. If you get merge conflict, you're fucked.
Git has a GUI tool called gitk which sucks, it is written in Tk and looks like it from 1980.

Git also has aliases that can make commands look like anything you like

Also, your original assertion was "It is inconsistent, confusing, frustrating, weird, awkward and not user friendly" and you've only given (valid) examples for "inconsistent". And maybe "confusing", although I fail to see anything confusing with HEAD and detached head.

[uid313]

So what exactly do you hate about Git? What kills your productivity?

The Git CLI is inconsistent, example to list things such as tags, commit history, branches, remotes, etc it uses different options to do it, sometimes it is --list, other times not.

Sometimes it expects syntax like "git://example.com/repo", sometimes "example.com:repo" (colon), sometimes "example.com repo" (space) sometimes "example/repo" (slash).

Git has confusing things such has head, detatched head, and many other confusing things. If you get merge conflict, you're fucked.
Git has a GUI tool called gitk which sucks, it is written in Tk and looks like it from 1980.

[Vistaus]

So what exactly do you hate about Git? What kills your productivity?

That too, and regarding "everyone hates Git": who is this "everyone" uid313 speaks of? I'm pretty sure I'm a human being that's part of "everyone", yet I like Git.

[bug77]

Git has been adopted by the masses, but they hate it.
Git is like SQL, everyone hates it, but it is so established that we're stuck with it.
Git is like Facebook, everybody hates it, but we can't use anything else, since that's what everybody else is using.

So what exactly do you hate about Git? What kills your productivity?

[nivag]

I am sure all these nerd features are cool, but is anything being done to improve the usability and user experience of Git?
It is inconsistent, confusing, frustrating, weird, awkward and not user friendly.

I've been using a variety of Source Control Systems for about 50 years, dating back from when MainFrames ruled the planet. Now I use git on Linux from the command line. There are only about 6 git commands I use regularly, and I have no problems looking up how do things in git for the less frequent tasks. I find git quite user friendly, and it does what I need without problems.

I've written programs in at least 30 languages (my favourite was ARM2/ARM3 asembler), on more than 6 different O/S.

Possibly you find programming difficult?