Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

ohshitgit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 520 posts

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#461

Post by yes_or_gnome »

compiler-guy wrote: post #452
yes_or_gnome wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SVN and P4 articles exists (just google for "svn mistakes" and "perforce p4 mistakes"), but either 1. nobody is sharing them to HN or 2. they do and nobody cares to vote them up. Unrelated topic (falling cats), same logical fallacy: http://www.radiolab.org/story/102525-vertigo/ (Starting around 14:20)

“Nobody submits them, or nobody cares to vote them up.” That should tell you something: these articles don’t resonate with the crowd. That should tell you something.

I take your original comment as an indictment that git is somehow broken by design. Which sure, you're entitled to an opinion, but to bring up SVN in the same breath is absurd.

That's why I replied.

I can't really address p4 because I haven't used it for any real world use cases. Only to prepare for an interview. With that limited use, I can't come with any reason to think it's superior.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#462

Post by Groxx »

dilap wrote: post #450
Groxx wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://gitup.co/ This looks fantastic, thanks for mentioning it! I've been looking for a GUI that doesn't mesh poorly with [whatever patterns my team uses] / without always pushing other features or a signup.

It's a really sweet piece of software, and I'm surprised it's not more popular. I'd be curious to hear how it ends up going for ya'll -- you can message me on twitter at @hazememry if you'd like.

So far I've found:

    it's reasonably fast until I throw it at a huge monorepo :)  but it still works (~2fps)!  even `gitk` errors on this one.
    missing some hotkeys (like prev/next commit buttons in preview)
    freezes on remote-repo actions like fetch/pull/etc.  likely due to our enterprisey ssh setup.
    generally missing a bit of polish.  click targets are small, could use some more config (and only in one location, "search commits" is in its own thing), etc
Aside from the remote repo freeze-up, I'm liking it a lot. Way better control than others I've tried (i.e. it has nearly all the features), undo support, and a much better mental-model for Git in general.

If I can figure out how to fix the remote freeze-up, it might become my daily driver, which would be a first for a Git GUI.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#463

Post by Noumenon72 »

nastysquar3d wrote: post #110
emeraldd wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What GUI do you recommend? My experience has been that GUIs are the easiest and fastest way to make a mess that can't be corrected without dropping to CLI or re-cloning. (I'm looking at you SourceTree). I've long recommended that everyone who uses git know how to use the CLI even if they don't use it regularly.

I use TortiseGit in my personal and work dev environments. It works works well. That being said, I have had to drop to CLI to fix things that were somewhat more hairy.

My company uses Mercurial still and TortoiseHg is the best thing about it. I can sling big piles of commits around, patch, graft, and search, it's all so easy. I hope it works as well for Git or Git can catch up.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#464

Post by chiefalchemist »

dasil003 wrote: post #418
chiefalchemist wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not feelblike that big of a deal, but certainly there has got to be on any given day far more important things you can use those brain cycles for, yes? Low friction or not it's still friction. Friction that can be removed. Yet so many refuse to do so. There's something wrong with this this-is-how-we've-always-do-it picture.

You make it sound like tradition or a cargo cult—it's not. Git is fundamentally better than most of the alternatives, but in my opinion it's misguided to try to slap a better interface over the warts. Rewriting the porcelain would be good, but I don't think it's personally worth investing in until someone makes an attempt that's good enough to get traction and significant mindshare. In the meantime I've already made…

Not to sound snarky / adversarial but why is it that (nearly) every article I see on Git has some sort of diagram within it? Yet "execution" is typically limited to CLI? That just feels suboptimal, if not just foolish.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#465

Post by craftyguy »

emodendroket wrote: post #446
dotancohen wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they should just call it 'push'. The word 'sync' is not in the Git terminology.

The GitHub desktop client is very limited and seems mostly geared toward a lone developer or small team who has never used git before. In this context I think it's a reasonable decision to use a more common verb.

Nope. That does no one any good. Using git verbage would, at the very least, acclimate them to very common terminology used by the rest of the folks they will eventually encounter.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#466

Post by antoaravinth »

swalsh wrote: post #123
lwansbrough wrote: post #42

Adopted a git GUI years ago and haven't looked back. I get looks sometimes, but I can't help but gloat when I can stage and unstage individual lines in less than a second. I think anyone who uses the CLI is either trying too hard or hasn't realized the beauty of a git GUI. Takeaways: - My commit time is usually much faster than coworkers, with higher accuracy (less frequent accidental commits, etc.) - I don't remembe…

I use the git CLI. I do it for one reason. I know exactly what i'm doing on it. I have nothing to prove to anyone, I'm not trying to impress anyone with my "hacker" skillz. When I've tried GUI's, I'm not 100% sure what's going on under the covers. Sometimes they try to obfuscate things. While I'm probably not the worlds most advanced user, I know enough to know what I want to do, and how to do it. The CLI let's me do…

This is exactly the same reason I too use CLI. But a word of caution Git Bash on windows has some serious problem(s). I remember, I lost my commit and in reflog it doesn't show up on CLI, however GIT UI showed the same! Not sure what's the issue, but it occurred for me twice.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#467

Post by justbaker »

lwansbrough wrote: post #42

Adopted a git GUI years ago and haven't looked back. I get looks sometimes, but I can't help but gloat when I can stage and unstage individual lines in less than a second. I think anyone who uses the CLI is either trying too hard or hasn't realized the beauty of a git GUI. Takeaways: - My commit time is usually much faster than coworkers, with higher accuracy (less frequent accidental commits, etc.) - I don't remembe…

I’ve only seen the opposite effect in practice. My odd look as well.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#468

Post by euske »

dasil003 wrote: post #247
dilap wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not anything inherent to a visual UI though, it's just that most of the UIs that exist are trying to put their own model on top of git, rather than embracing git's model. The one exception to this I've found is GitUp (mac only, sadly), and it's excellent. It's whole model is, "what operations can I perform on this graph," which is exactly the model git has. It's great.

I think you've put your finger on the schism of why so many git users prefer a GUI. The built-in porcelain is stupidly inconsistent and confusing. And yet, git's underlying model is so simple and powerful that I think it's worth suffering the bad CLI just to be more fluent and able to utilize git's power fully. The model itself is very easy to grok, it just takes some time to memorize the various random incantations…

"C language is so simple and powerful that I think it's worth suffering the bad syntax and memory leak just to be more fluent and be able to utilize the machine's power fully."

Pick the right tool for the right job, man.

Joking aside, think about the ratio of tasks. Most of the git commands I do is deadly simple. There might be once-in-a-year complex tasks that are more suitable to CLI, but for 99% of the tasks I think GUI could have a net gain in total. Although I'm not a GUI user in this particular case, I'd advocate to use whatever most intuitive to you when possible.

Disclaimer: I don't think C syntax is that bad.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#469

Post by jdc0589 »

aldanor wrote: post #186
swalsh wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use the git CLI. I do it for one reason. I know exactly what i'm doing on it. I have nothing to prove to anyone, I'm not trying to impress anyone with my "hacker" skillz. When I've tried GUI's, I'm not 100% sure what's going on under the covers. Sometimes they try to obfuscate things. While I'm probably not the worlds most advanced user, I know enough to know what I want to do, and how to do it. The CLI let's me do…

There are GUIs that are very close to CLI that don't try to reinvent a wheel and instead just map directly to what git does. The best one, I think, being Magit for Emacs (if you can call that a 'GUI' given you can run it in the terminal). If you get used to commit things by-line instead of by-file (which is generally highly recommended with git), and also clean up your history/squash things a lot, using git cli gets…

GitExtensions was/is solid too; very little abstraction, it was just built for speed/efficiency. Someone recently told me it runs on Mono too now, but I haven't used it in years and never outside of Windows.

Re: Oh shit, git: Getting myself out of bad situations

#470

Post by benliong78 »

Groxx wrote: post #422
dilap wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not anything inherent to a visual UI though, it's just that most of the UIs that exist are trying to put their own model on top of git, rather than embracing git's model. The one exception to this I've found is GitUp (mac only, sadly), and it's excellent. It's whole model is, "what operations can I perform on this graph," which is exactly the model git has. It's great.

http://gitup.co/ This looks fantastic, thanks for mentioning it! I've been looking for a GUI that doesn't mesh poorly with [whatever patterns my team uses] / without always pushing other features or a signup.

Thanks for the recommendation. Fantastic looking software that provides a far better visualization of the repo than anything else I have used. Bravo.

I use CLI for almost everything but sometimes it helps to have a visual representation of the repo.

Post reply on HN