> Claiming the problem must be with the user and their inability to learn the system

Please do not put words in my mouth.

I agree that the interface could be a lot better and honestly hope it improves. I do not expect this to happen anytime soon so I work with what I've got.

That being said, the problems git solves in the way that it does so are tricky to wrap your head around. This is why I push people to learn the concepts, not because I think people are stupid for not committing (heh) a bunch of arbitrary commands to memory.

The fact that the interface is so unintuitive is exactly why I like to promote learning the concepts instead of just the commands.

Once you understand the concepts (with or without knowing any of the commands), not only is it sometimes easier to remember the commands, it makes things like cheatsheets useful.

> Indeed, nearly all computer systems demand that when you get to a developer, operations, or admin level. It's actually kind of condescending to keep seeing people repeating that over and over.

Some people, for whatever reason, just don't treat git this way. I've seen plenty of people treat it like they treat tar or some other tool where they just remember a bucket of commands and wonder why nothing ever works.

If it's obvious to you, then I apologize for it sounding condescending, but it's just not obvious to everyone.

Another comparison: iptables with its hard-to-remember syntax, vs ufw.

As UFW is just a wrapper for iptables, I wonder if there's a real possibly of a Git replacement just being a wrapper that simplifies the syntax and maybe some of the conceptual model.