Git. Having lived through many cycles of version control systems (VSS, SVN, TFS, Hg), this one has gone on long enough to be replaced with something more intuitive. I think a lot of project complexity is work arounds of inherent Git issues. But I'm just a caveman lawyer.

▲ mikewarot 32 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The main blocker for me was having the wrong mental model of what GIT really is. I thought it was all about deltas, and saving each and every "change" to a file, which was dead nuts wrong.

GIT makes snapshots of everything. The functionality is a bit oddly distributed in terms of the command set, but it's all snapshots. You could make a fully compatible program that just does a full snapshot (without ever looking for merge errors, etc), to make everything easy-peasy.

  I bet there's a command line way to do that already....

▲ yjftsjthsd-h 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Have you had a chance to try jj? (It's git compatible)

▲ giraffe_lady 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I switched to fossil for personal projects a few years ago. Documentation and ticket system already there, hosts itself so don't need to bother with github etc. Different collaboration model but so far has worked fine when I've needed to bring other people in.

	▲	spiderxxxx 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		fossil is great, and I wish more companies used it. It's so simple, has everything you need, documentation, bugs, email alerts, chat, a forum, a wiki. It's all there. Having to go to jira to manage something, confluence for something else, git for source code and bug tracking, it's all a mess, when you can use something like fossil. Yet all I hear when I mention fossil is "never heard of it, not using some toy project, sticking to what I know".