why is git the standard?are there better options?
>>108864459Microsoft Delta is all anyone ever needed.
>>108864459Mercurial just works.Git is fine but don't usr cloud.
>>108864459git is standard because of who was involved. it sucked early on. it’s decent now.>but ui / ux sucks donkey ballstrue, use jujutsu as a frontend (it uses git underneath so you can use it even if the rest of your team uses vanilla git)>but I want something more self-containeduse fossil>but mercurial or my-pet-favoriteit’s over jim, an argument could be made 12 years ago but not now. don’t waste time on dead techEssentially fossil + jujutsu covers everything you’d want unless you have some esotheric requirements like storing huge binary blobs
>>108864459Idk about any of the properietary shit but all open source version control systems suck donkey ballsI prefer just zipping up my source code every now and then and copying it to all my devices as a backup
>>108864632Based anon living it up in the 1995
a true hacker doesn't need more than https://fossil-scm.org
>>108864632This, there's no point for any of them. If you want to see changelogs just do a diff and if you need commit messages just comment your shit
Employment is the big differentiator. Git is the standard in most companies, so if you want to maximize job opportunities, you need to be competent with Git. If you're self employed you can of course use whatever you want. Sometimes you can find a small shop that uses something else and have no interest in moving to Git.
I tried fossil two times, every time saw no point in it. I know git and it's enough for me. I'm sure fossil works for SQlite devs and I'm usually all for the underdogs, but I can't say I'm sold on the idea of version control being integrated with a task manager and presented through an ugly UI.
>>108864632Having used IBM/Rational ClearCase, I can confirm proprietary shit is also shit.
>>108864667This. If you are working on personal projects fossil is dead simple to use and intuitive too. I use it to make drafts of my writing as well.
>>108864611Fossil is a good idea, but its merge model is kinda shit. Also the fact is, everyone uses git as a centralized system in practice, in large parts because of the lack of self-contained accessory services (hence why fossil is a good idea). Modern svn is unironically better than modern git. Git is total trash. There, I said it.
>>108864459>why is git the standard?cause of git rebasePro tip: You shouldn't overuse rebase, a merge is fine.
>>108864697This.People who shill fossil mostly found its concept appealing, while never actually actually using it.I would rather ship a .tar.gz with a CHANGELOG file and accept patches per email, than using fossil.Fossil just tries to be too much at once.
Just use git. If you need anything else you are a retard. If you want GUI just use SourceTree.
>>108865888t. never used git except solo
>>108864459Really interesting alternative from the sqlite team https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki. Git and github wrapped in one, a github frontend was the real reason git went from being distributed to the github downloader tool.
Just use git from CLI self-hosted.
>>108864697It's still just a small completely self-contained static binary.Fossil is based around SQLite so adding things like a little issue tracker is almost free and can be completely ignored if you don't need it.>>108865792I do.
>>108866976It can be ignored, but then I feel like they don't quite go all the way about integrating wiki and project management into version control. It all feels like multiple unrelated things stitched together rather than one system that actually makes sense.
ngl I use git because of free hosting services.if they didnt exist I would still be packing the source dirs into ZIP and sever that and build binaries on static sever
>>108867187>they don't quite go all the way about integrating wiki and project management into version controlone of the things I like is making a wiki page for significant branches, to provide an explanation of what's going on for others who are working on the repo; it's a bit like having a github PR except without the whole process ceremony thing
>>108864459>why is git the standard?Because its not that bad. Also github and Linux>are there better options?Mercurial was created by a woman called Olivia Mackall and I heard good things about it, but never used it.Fossil is also interesting but I would rather keep the ability to clean up my git log
>>108869056>Fossil is also interesting but I would rather keep the ability to clean up my git logSo your autism prefers things looking clean instead of things being perfectly preserved. I'm the opposite.Fossil lets you hide commits and branches, but it is much more oriented towards a merge workflow than git is. Also, fossil handles a diverging branch better than git; you can lose commits accidentally in git. (With fossil, you can shun a commit if you must, such as if you fucked up and put your API keys in, but shunning is really awkward and not an expected part of anyone's work pattern.)
