> If someone changes something in glibc and find the result fails > to build or fails to pass the glibc testsuite, they then need to > debug the problem. Debugging a problem like that is much more > complicated, and much less susceptible to having a single set of > instructions to follow, than the case of investigating history > using git.
I fully agree with Joseph on this issue. It is not an unreasonable expectation to expect experience with git. We don't require git for anything in the GNU project, let alone being able to use it to contribute a change. You can get away happily without learning any git commands and still be able to contribute to the GNU project. Just like being fluent in English is not an requirement, it is unreasonable to expect that being fluent in git magic is mandatory. In fact I think knowing git is mandatory today. Really it is not...
