Add new comment

I used to be like this, with Git, but it required extra effort to maintain it.
I don't get along with Git.

I consider it to be flawed, confusing, and difficult to learn. In fact, I suspect that it is intentionally confusing, so that only those who are willing to jump through hoops can access software development. And that same learning cost makes you think... I am an expert, a pro... because I have made an effort, and therefore you defend something unacceptably dysfunctional (I am very bad-minded).

Why have to reinvent a whole terminology that goes beyond the understandable move, copy, cut, paste, duplicate?

Imagine a world where a VCS behaved like a Filezila.
You simply upload the files, and the manager itself asked you what you want to do in case of a conflict. Do you want to replace the file or just its modified content?

What do I want to contribute? I move... and the operation is suspended until the original maintainer accepts.
A new branch? I duplicate.

Etc

Old versions are not being compiled because I consider that they do not make sense with the new ones. If it ever makes sense to keep a version, it will be included in the zip.

I know that losing the history to check the evolution of the project is a great loss... but until there is a VCS to my liking, I will use Git only if I am going to collaborate with other projects.