Subject: Re: git and time

From: Andreas Ericsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:52:34 +0200

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Matthew L Foster wrote:
>> From a web display/generic notion of integrity perspective time order 
>> matters to me but it looks like I am the only one. Keeping track of 
>> _local_ commit time would not add any dependencies.
> 
> Actually, I think one problem here is that anybody why looks at just the 
> gitweb interface may not realize how git works.
> 
> If you use gitk as your primary way of learning about a git problem, the 
> whole time issue just goes away, because gitk shows the _real_ 
> relationships so well.
> 
> I used gitk in all my initial explanations of git, because it turned a 
> fairly abstract "here, let me explain how it works" into a "See? Look at 
> this" kind of situation.
> 

True that. I would have had a hard time introducing git as The SCM in 
the company if it hadn't been for gitk and qgit. They both let you just 
skip over 90% of that initial steep part of the learning curve and jump 
straight to work.

> I think gitweb is great (in a way I have _never_ felt about any of the CVS 
> web interfaces I have ever seen), but gitweb doesn't really explain how 
> things work as well as gitk does.
> 

Someone started hacking on a web-thingie to show the graph. Whatever 
happened to that? If it's no longer alive, perhaps we could add some 
qgit/gitk screenshots to the git wiki/docs so the people who spend most 
of their lives in browsers can get some visual aid in understanding the 
way git works.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   [email-masked]
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231