There's new GIT instructions on Github now

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ir6ph4$1he8$7 at digitalmars.com...
> Am 21.05.2011 00:15, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>> "Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ir6jup$1he8$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> Am 20.05.2011 22:26, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>>>> "Don" <nospam at nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:ir55o4$2lhg$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's my list of bugs in git for windows which I found in the first
>>>>> fews
>>>>> days of using it:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Windows git's handling of paths is completely screwed.
>>>>> If you've checked out your working copy into (say) c:\foo\bar\dmd
>>>>> and you rename a parent directory, eg to c:\foo2\bar\dmd, your working
>>>>> copy gets hosed.
>>>>> Maybe this happens only after you've performed a git operation; didn't
>>>>> experiment with it much.
>>>>
>>>> That one's kind of funny, actually. Linus himself pretty much considers
>>>> SVN
>>>> to be total shit, and yet SVN handles that perfectly fine, while his
>>>> program
>>>> apperently doesn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You wouldn't really expect that Linus cares about Windows support, would
>>> you? I guess on Linux git works really well (haven't used it much yet).
>>>
>>> Microsofts VCS (Visual Sourcesafe or something like that) won't work
>>> properly on Linux either..
>>
>> Microsoft is a corporation. So by definition, self-interested (Besides, 
>> VSS
>> is rightfully dead anyway). Linus isn't a corporation and he isn't 
>> selling
>> Linux. But he is, presumably, a self-respecting software developer and 
>> not a
>> self-righteous ass that's out to throw his weight around at any whim (or 
>> is
>> he?). So why not?
>>
>
> Yeah, Linus is not a corporation, he doesn't get paid to develop git, so
> why should he spend his precious time for Windows support that he (and
> his targeted userbase, i.e. Linux kernel developers) doesn't need?

Because it makes it a better product and, presumably, he cares about his 
software being good. And like I said, *I* make damn sure my software is 
sensibly cross-platform, and of all the things I bitch about, sensibly 
supporting another major OS has never been one of them. And the fact that I 
didn't write Windows doesn't invalidate the comparison: If I wrote OSS 
program A that was an alternative to program B, and then I wrote OSS program 
X that interacted with program A, you can be damn sure I'd be interested in 
X being compatible with B, too.