Change Control and What Will Come After Git (If That's Still Possible at All)
"I'm an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects after myself. First 'Linux', now 'git'." -Linus Torvalds
I'm fortunate enough to have programmed since a relatively young age. I grew up around coders and children of software developers, so the concept was never outlandish to me. In the CVS years I tried command line clients and GUIs. Years later, in University, I helped manage SVN. Later came Git, then came some Web interfaces for it (or Web sites, which would simply strive to be central(ised) hubs that swallow everything worldwide, turning it into a plagiarism factory more than a decade later without permission from copyright holders).
Always beware 'free' stuff (gratis). Foresight helps avert instant gratification/convenience one may come to regret later. They say "nothing in the world is free" because the planet isn't a charity. Animals eat other animals. Remember that. That 'free' food in the 'free' farm with the 'free' roof fills your belly; maybe your belly belongs to the farmer.
The other day in IRC (our network) Git came up because of some projects that foolishly insist on outsourcing to Microsoft (GitHub), which is proprietary. Even some projects that strive to replace Microsoft's GitHub are foolishly using - i.e. getting used by - Microsoft/GitHub.
"TR News" (in IRC) said: "No project NEEDS GitHub. None! Microsoft needs many fools who THINK they need it!"
When did Linus Torvalds (pictured on the left when he was still a 'freeman') last condemn Microsoft or GitHub? Would that be too "toxic"? Is he even allowed to anymore? Microsoft bought bossing roles. It has the seats at the Linux Foundation. We know the founder of Git does not like GitHub, does not use GitHub, but he doesn't publicly talk about it anymore. RMS - unlike Torvalds - spoke about this in August.
"We should find some articles about Git for the Links," an associate noted. "Anytime Microsoft GitHub gets mentioned, alternatives should have links..."
I said I would only suggest using Git locally (no third party site, maybe no Web interface either). That means installing Git's server end on one's laptop or on a server with one's domain (so that it can be moved around shall that be needed). This means that alternatives to Microsoft ought not be some "JSware" like Gitlab but something usable that isn't a covert trap. There's no such thing as free Git hosting. It may only be temporarily free, unless you own it (and thus pay for it directly as long as you wish to keep it).
I noted that "when i did cvs and svn we didn't do "hubs" [...] we had intranet, at most [...] it made sense" (and typically people work in proximity anyway, especially when they collaborate on code in the same institution/company/home).
Even though a lack of functionality can be a plus (making things simpler and easier to learn), "CVS was a major PITA," the associate recalled. "I vaguely remember it was impossible to delete directories or something..."
The associate remember that "OpenBSD has developed a Git-compatible client with an interoperable subset of Git's features. I expect that maybe some day they will switch over, but there are moles there and Microsoft GitHub is somehow involved at the moment..."
There are still many people who use CVS and it works for them. Unless one collaborates with many other people worldwide, CVS can still work, especially for version management in one's single-developer project.
CVS does exist by the way. It still exists. It's not ubiquitous, but it's still out there.
I said "we don't know (yet) what will supersede git and WHY/when [as] fundamentally change management is not hard with Swiss army knives like diff(a), but there is too much monoculture now [... ] they tell kids they need "Microsoft Github" to find a job..."
I noted that "Linus [Torvalds] spent very little time working on git [sic] it's like Reddit and [Aaron] Swartz [as] they use his name" (for publicity).
"Probably nothing will follow Git," the associate said, "as there are too few skilled people allowed to come up in the tracks. Few have the potential to learn the skills, fewer are actually permitted (by Microsoft institutions) to actually acquire the skills."
I said Torvalds had managed to replace or overtake the SVN wave, "but he has the skill," the associate responded. "Most who have jobs, even if they know C, are spending their working hours filling out time management forms, CoC compliance forms, and diversity training."
"Not as bad as with Reddit and Swartz," he added. "Linus actually did start Git and he actually uses it. Reddit was hated by Swartz who quit over how bad it was to be employed there and just plain stopped showing up. Only after his death did they lie and pretend that he got them started, so as to steal readership from the floundering Slashdot."
Reddit - like Digg.com and Twitter - cannot last forever. Git won't be the standard for much longer either (probably less than a decade left before something overtakes it). It's just that we don't know what will happen next and why. Nobody knows. It would be wrong to believe (at least misguided) Git can be a "standard" skill 30 or 50 years from now.
"Git will go away sooner than later," the associate said, "if there are enough people with skill and experience to make a better version control system. Not only is coding a requirement but also wide experience working in both small and large groups. I wonder if Golang would be a good match or should Zig be a better fit, if one does not stick with natural C..." █