"Using ZFS as a replacement of Git for is probably not a good idea"

That's from the article... You know... that thing you didn't read?

I don't know what the correct term is for the kind of title here but it's not supposed to be literal.

EDIT: title is tongue in cheek.. maybe even linkbait but in a clever way rather than a negative way.

Yeah, but the title is still interesting on its own.

This isn't slashdot, John. If you're going to be a sarcastic dick for no good reason, you at least have to be able to pretend you read the article first.

I'm sure he feels terrible, Matt.

Only because he misspelled my name.

oh guys, you have so much humor! (speaking FOR the comment)

I in fact started actually reading the article only to be let down that it is not about an alternative to git. Remember the times when there was a correlation? Welcome to the tricking-each-other-into-reading-stuff age.

I want to keep the right to believe that an article is a long version of the title, thus keep the right to comment on the idea held in the title as if it was the content. Don't forget that there could always be a longer version.

And considering the title only, the comment does have its place. Now go downvote me too.