compare available git tutorials/training materials

[yarikoptic]

It would be nice if we had some "rating" of the materials we present. E.g. some tutorials might be aiming to present tools more as a black box and depict their functionality, and others try to present "philosophy"/internals of the tools, thus theoretically making user more knowledgeable and capable of navigating and recovering from failures better.

E.g. here is a set of git tutorials which imho approach Git from different sides

• Software Carpentry: Version Control with Git
• PyDiagogue: Git Foundations
• Learn Git for the piece of mind and profit

and it would be good to know on what should be the suggested order of exploring them... either one of them is so superior that the other one wouldn't be needed?

[ninapreuss]

OK, so I think we need to drop pydagogue due to it's approach (references to ahole and religion). I don't think it's in line with our inclusive agnostic training approach.

[ninapreuss]

So, "Software Carpentry: Version Control with Git" is well organized and well done. There is a lot of the same information in "Learn Git for the piece of mind and profit", but there are some things in the latter that didn't jump out for me in the SW carpentry tutorial.

I get back to wanting to break out even this training into the right audience. I see on Moodle someone coming and selecting from different researcher profiles to then see what is the right training, and in this case, the right Git training for their profile.

Types of Profiles: Clinician or Researcher With No Coding Experience; Coder without Clinical or Research Experience; Researcher with Basic Coding Experience; Researcher with Moderate Coding Experience; Researcher Finetuning Full Contact Reproducibility.

For the first No Coding profile that may never push code updates, should we just point to the explain the basics of version control and direct them to RStudio even thought that's listed last in SW Carpentry? For other profiles, other levels of course.

The "few useful tips for common tasks" is a helpful section, and should definitely be included for the right audience. @yarikoptic can you give me a time we can talk about this next week?

[jbpoline]

Hi! How we discuss briefly this during our next call ? The categorization / profiles is a good general discussion point. Cheers JB

[ninapreuss]

Sure

[yarikoptic]

@ninapreuss this is the successor of the git parable: https://matthew-brett.github.io/curious-git/curious_journey.html as a part of the "Curious git" tutorial

[jbpoline]

Matthew's tutorials are very good