git's prevalence today is purely because it won the popularity contest, plain and simple
I don't believe that is at all plain and simple (or correct). I worked with many DVCS systems before git. git was obviously better, from the moment I first tinkered with it, and the more I understood of its internals the more obviously better it seemed. There's a reason that after years of DVCS fighting it out for turf and never really gaining any traction, git exploded onto the scene and took over a huge portion of projects. git got everything right...that's why it won the "popularity contest".
On top of that, while git may be a big deal for developers, git's importance to the world at large is tiny
Developers make the world as we know it today. And git is what developers use. github is awesome, but git is the engine to github's fancy automobile exterior.
The internal combustion engine changed the world. It did it by way of automobiles (and other powered machines), but the internal combustion engine, in and of itself, was required for any of that stuff to come into existence. Likewise, git is the engine for numerous things.
I'm not sure I understand how hackers can continually underestimate the impact of our own tools and technology. There are millions of developers using git today, and the ones who use git are the most important and influential developers in the world. Sometimes I wonder if nerds even realize how much impact they have on the "real world"....
It is the idea of the combustion engine, and the fact that it became technical possible to build them that changed the world. It's not any particular combustion engine, but the combustion engine industry as a whole.
Yes, the combustion engine is very important for a car, but it became a commodity.
Yes, DVCS changed the world. Git maybe more than others because of its popularity, but slowly I think they are becoming commodities. Github could function with any other DVCS and practically all major DVCS (git, mercurial, darcs, bazaar) are interoperable one with another, making the choice more personal than technological.
It's the front end that the github people have created which is desirable. They could have created something very similar with Darcs or Mercurial and it would of been just as nice to use.
I don't believe that is at all plain and simple (or correct). I worked with many DVCS systems before git. git was obviously better, from the moment I first tinkered with it, and the more I understood of its internals the more obviously better it seemed. There's a reason that after years of DVCS fighting it out for turf and never really gaining any traction, git exploded onto the scene and took over a huge portion of projects. git got everything right...that's why it won the "popularity contest".
On top of that, while git may be a big deal for developers, git's importance to the world at large is tiny
Developers make the world as we know it today. And git is what developers use. github is awesome, but git is the engine to github's fancy automobile exterior.