No I don’t. You’re confusing motivation with requirements. I’m talking about requirements.
But of advice. Outside of TV programming, when an American is talking about why a tool was created, they almost always mean its purpose, not its origin story. That inspiration story on TV is aimed at inventors. The people who use the tools don’t care, and it’s an anecdote for the rest of us.
I suspect that has something to do with that illusion we maintained of American Ingenuity. I don’t need the back story, what’s it for?
> But of advice. Outside of TV programming, when an American is talking about why a tool was created, they almost always mean its purpose, not its origin story.
It's so bizarre you're giving advice here based on such strong assumptions. There was absolutely no need to bring nationality into this discussion at all.
I'm sorry people are being dismissively snide and downvotive about this reasonable characterization of things (see: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=111288700902396) because they think knowing the factoid that linux used bitkeeper is some kind of "epic own".
> This prompted the Linux development community (and in particular Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux) to develop their own tool based on some of the lessons they learned while using BitKeeper.
(Emphasis mine). Git was designed with the experience of using BitKeeper in mind.
