Sure, but there are already "tools to help you" in this realm that are easier to grok.
Early on, developers saved old versions of code via manual copying. That was really easy to grok (Label floppy with "1983 Aug 12", copy, put in box). But it sucked.
So developers invented things like SCCS or RCS, which stored metadata. But they were harder to grok, as now you had to understand the idea of files having history (and branches), and needing to be "checked out" using tools entirely different from standard copying, and being "locked" against change. But they helped, even though they still kind of sucked.
So hackers invented CVS and Subversion, which worked on trees instead of files, used implicit locking and merge algorithms, and generally made life better. But they were yet harder to grok! Now doing regular development meant that occasionally you'd get collisions: you needed to understand the 3-way merge algorithm just to write code. And they still sucked.
So Linus gave us git. Which adds a bunch of new hard-to-grok abstractions like the index and commit ID. But it fixes a bunch of problems too, even if 10 years from now we'll agree that it sucked too.
So pick your point along that spectrum and choose your tool to match your comfort level. In short: your complaints aren't anything new, SCM systems have always been confusing to learn.
Why did everything suck? Are we even addressing the problems as we trudge along your linear development path? I think what your parent was getting at is that increasing complexity of SCM software is orthogonal to the problem, which hasn't really been defined well.
It's easy to say that something sucks, but it's harder to say why.
Early on, developers saved old versions of code via manual copying. That was really easy to grok (Label floppy with "1983 Aug 12", copy, put in box). But it sucked.
So developers invented things like SCCS or RCS, which stored metadata. But they were harder to grok, as now you had to understand the idea of files having history (and branches), and needing to be "checked out" using tools entirely different from standard copying, and being "locked" against change. But they helped, even though they still kind of sucked.
So hackers invented CVS and Subversion, which worked on trees instead of files, used implicit locking and merge algorithms, and generally made life better. But they were yet harder to grok! Now doing regular development meant that occasionally you'd get collisions: you needed to understand the 3-way merge algorithm just to write code. And they still sucked.
So Linus gave us git. Which adds a bunch of new hard-to-grok abstractions like the index and commit ID. But it fixes a bunch of problems too, even if 10 years from now we'll agree that it sucked too.
So pick your point along that spectrum and choose your tool to match your comfort level. In short: your complaints aren't anything new, SCM systems have always been confusing to learn.