Hmm, well, Cogito was there from the _very_ start (it popped up one or two days after Git 0.01, I think; first under the git-pasky name, but the first month was just very wild). I don't think there was actually any big fluctuation in the Git frontends, I can't remember any Git frontends which came and gone - which ones do you have on mind?
In fact, from Cogito point of view, Git indeed _is_ an (important) implementation detail. Perhaps I didn't put enough accent on Cogito being a version control system on its own.
I'm confused about the Cogito link, the only link I can see leads to the list of release tarballs - is that what you mean, that it would look better if there would be a direct link to the latest version? It wouldn't ever occur to me that this might make a negative impression, but perhaps you are right... - that's a valuable observation (if I understood you right, that is), thanks!
There's several pieces listed on the Git website, and when I've seen Git in conversations I've seen people refer to a couple different pieces. Many of those pieces may not be version control systems... all I know is there's a bunch of things, and it's unclear which is which. That "Git" gets all the fame due to its lineage, yet is a fairly low-level bit of code, probably doesn't help the situation.I'm confused about the Cogito link, the only link I can see leads to the list of release tarballs - is that what you mean, that it would look better if there would be a direct link to the latest version?
No, there should be a link to a real website! That website should show a quick sample of how to use it, links to docs, etc. It would probably be good to explain Cogito's relation to Git and other tools as well. A link to an index of files gives the impression that it's a really low-level tool, or else that it is a tool very early in its development. At least that's what I usually think when I encounter such a page.# Ian Bicking