Could you explain what you mean by svn being super complicated inside? I presume you mean from a user's not a programmer's perspective; I never found it confusing, ever.
It has it's flaws (tags are writable, unless that's been cured) but it's really pretty good, and far better than git for a beginner IMO.
I meant that SVN's internal concepts and workings are not simple. It's easy to use in the beginning, but it becomes difficult to even understand what's going on when you get into some kind of a tricky or unusual situation.
In Git, no matter how strange the situation, everything is still blobs, trees, commits, and refs. There are very few concepts used in Git, and they're simple and elegant.
SVN to Git is like WordPress to Jekyll - WordPress is easier to use than Jekyll, but Jekyll is simpler than WordPress.
I'm afraid I've still no idea what you mean. I've had plenty of confusion with git, and none that I can ever recall with SVN.
SVN's concepts are straightforward - commit stuff, branch, branches are COW so efficient, history is immutable unlike git (for better or worse) erm, other stuff. Never got confusing.
Could you explain what you mean by svn being super complicated inside? I presume you mean from a user's not a programmer's perspective; I never found it confusing, ever.
It has it's flaws (tags are writable, unless that's been cured) but it's really pretty good, and far better than git for a beginner IMO.