> for knowingly setting up ill-conceived software to go viral
I doubt that was the intention. Linux just needed a versioning system tailored to its needs, and that's exactly what Git is. Can't blame its creators that other people used it for scenarios it wasn't built for.
Right, you are the cop-out I am complaining about. Linus is the premier figurehead of the premier open-source project. When a build tool he made for that project goes viral it isn't an accident. If it was anybody else's pet versioning control system would we even be talking about it?
What you're saying is that anything Linus does, for whatever purpose, should be designed to cover a wide variety of use cases and please a large number of people, even if he's just writing something for himself. I think that's an unrealistic expectation.
If it went viral, yes. I agree most of the time I feel like the world is run by evil folks twiddling their fingers in secret.
This is not one of those times. I agree there's a chance there are better word choices or feedback for some commands, but overall once you 'learn the language' it really is a lean, mean, well designed piece of software.
Folks that complain about the UI/UX don't realize it wasn't designed for less technical folks. It was designed for the folks who needed it.
It's success must at least partially prove that the UI/UX is not 1/10. Any real engineer will tell you, there are times where they wish they could do something better but the requirements and constraints left them making tough decisions, and that doesn't mean they aren't proud of their work.
It's success is also partially due to the fact that it is lean and mean, which allows it to be applicable to nearly all software projects of any flavor. So I don't understand why folks argue it could have been done better. If it was 'better', in my view it wouldn't have been successful. The success was driven by it's succinct design and Linus' take it or leave it attitude.
Technically accurate studio monitors don't sound as pleasing to the ear as good well tuned speakers. But they are exceptional at the job they were designed for. This is like that.
There is no cop-out. I use git, with pleasure and gratitude, for everything, because of its excellent design and performance. It appeals to my intuition, and I like the interface. You are entitled to your opinion, but not to confuse it with objective reality.
I doubt that was the intention. Linux just needed a versioning system tailored to its needs, and that's exactly what Git is. Can't blame its creators that other people used it for scenarios it wasn't built for.