> An introduction such as this, should also explain about ways of working with git and not just explain the commands.
Amen! Too often, and this isn't exclusive to git edu, there's too focus on features and not enough on benefits.
Saying "this is the command and this is the syntax" provides no context. Git is especially context sensitivity. Without seeing real life examples of _why_ and _when_ the how is meaningless and in turn forgettable.
I also doing understand why these isn't a solid and reliable UI. Maybe there is and I struggle to find it. How fitting? ;) The point being, git is a series of events (commits and merges), or across dimensions (i.e., other team members). It is, at very least, a three dimensional graph. Stuff that into two dimensions and then into a command line well that qualifies as elitism and jargon.
The idea behind the tool is excellent, and necessary. But how it's executed? In 2020? It feels too much like a fax machine.
Amen! Too often, and this isn't exclusive to git edu, there's too focus on features and not enough on benefits.
Saying "this is the command and this is the syntax" provides no context. Git is especially context sensitivity. Without seeing real life examples of _why_ and _when_ the how is meaningless and in turn forgettable.
I also doing understand why these isn't a solid and reliable UI. Maybe there is and I struggle to find it. How fitting? ;) The point being, git is a series of events (commits and merges), or across dimensions (i.e., other team members). It is, at very least, a three dimensional graph. Stuff that into two dimensions and then into a command line well that qualifies as elitism and jargon.
The idea behind the tool is excellent, and necessary. But how it's executed? In 2020? It feels too much like a fax machine.