31–40 of 520 posts
I've browsed through a few git guides, but can't seem to find anything that would let me:
1) Do something like "du -s *|sort -n" for the entire Git history
2) Let me "rm -rf --from-history-too", that would cause the remote repo to actually shrink in size.
In three years of using git I believe there is a single bad command that I could not undo: `git checkout -- somefile` The second worst thing I did is losing a commit in a `git rebase -i` but I was able to find it back with `git reflog`. Which makes me think that git is really well designed.
I like using IDEA, PyCharm's and Webstorm's "local history" feature to compensate for gaps in my git knowledge. A constant, instant backup of all files, independent of the repo, has been my saving grace for small projects.
In three years of using git I believe there is a single bad command that I could not undo: `git checkout -- somefile` The second worst thing I did is losing a commit in a `git rebase -i` but I was able to find it back with `git reflog`. Which makes me think that git is really well designed.
In a similar vain to `git checkout`, `git reset --hard` is also an excellent way to loose uncommitted work.
In three years of using git I believe there is a single bad command that I could not undo: `git checkout -- somefile` The second worst thing I did is losing a commit in a `git rebase -i` but I was able to find it back with `git reflog`. Which makes me think that git is really well designed.
Nice. For anyone who hasn't see it, Flight Rules for Git is even more comprehensive: https://github.com/k88hudson/git-flight-rules
I'm planning on making a hard push for git on the team I just joined (that isn't using any VCS). This and OP are going in my bookmarks.
No judgment, nobody is born knowing this stuff, just that I'm surprised to hear this is still out in the wild.
In three years of using git I believe there is a single bad command that I could not undo: `git checkout -- somefile` The second worst thing I did is losing a commit in a `git rebase -i` but I was able to find it back with `git reflog`. Which makes me think that git is really well designed.
If by "designed" you mean "picking a content-addressable DAG as an underlying data structure", then yes, it is really beautiful. If you mean "provide a sane level of abstraction over said data structure", then hell no!
I don't think it provides the most consistent UI or helpful help, though. Once you move away from "learning git commands" to "learning how git works" and kind of figuring out which parts the commands refer to has helped also. That's still terrible though.
But even after nearly 10 years, the pressure from the aint-nobody-got-time-for-that crowd is still there. I really, really hope that the git devs don't feel pushed to simplify and therefore depower git. Thinking turning VIM into the Windows text editor.