Yes, Java is orders of magnitude more complex than erlang. What kind of comparison were you trying to make?

I knew that no matter what languages I picked for my examples, that someone on hn was going to respond that yes, in fact language B is much simpler than language A. I believe you understood the comparison I was trying to make and I'm not interested in a discussion about how simple erlang really is, it's besides the point..

No I do not understand the comparison. Java's syntax, virtual machine, libraries, everything is orders of magnitude more complex than the erlang stack. And indeed, proper introduction and reference of Java can fill a whole bookshelf, where as a couple of printed technical reports does the same for erlang.

Back to the original topic, git is also way more complex than a DVCS needs to be (compare e.g. with monotone, or just about any other DVCS). And any DVCS is way more complex than even the most difficult to use centralized repositories. So I think the OP's point is valid. There is at least corrolation going on here.

So you do believe that if there are more books and tutorials about a topic that means its more complex?

It's Bayesian evidence that the subject might be more complex, yes.

No, it's not. It's less complicated and more popular, hence has more books written about it.

No, its both more complicated and more popular, and both factors contribute to it having more books written about it.