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

471–480 of 520 posts

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

#471

Post by sb8244 »

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'm in such agreement here.

I often see files that clearly shouldn't have been committed. I always bring up using Sourcetree or something else, but everyone seems to think that it's okay the way it is. I can't force it on them and to each their own. It is really frustrating though, because there's this stigma against using a git GUI, but the end results of using one are (in my experience) significantly better.

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

#472

Post by piyush_soni »

rhencke wrote: post #456
nothrabannosir wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Git is fundamentally better than most of the alternatives No way. Only if you define “good” as “good at the kind of project that git is good at,” where it will hold vacuously. I suffer daily through the cyst that is git LFS, and it’s a joke. It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic. I hear that it’s not doing any better in large scale mono repo land. Google doesn’t use it, afaik. Microsoft does (but multi repo, la…

1. Git LFS is not part of Git. It's an unofficial extension, despite the name. I've got my own qualms about Git, but that's like complaining about GitHub's forking model as a reason Git is bad. 2. Microsoft uses Git in single large-scale mono repo form, for - believe it or not - Windows. It clocks in at about 3.5 million files, and a full clone weighs in at 300GB: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/bharry/2017/05/24/th…

Microsoft uses Git in single large-scale mono repo form

They had to change git itself to be able to do that. So no, the article itself shows it was not ready for that big a repository.

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

#473

Post by chris_wot »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #464
dasil003 wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The issue is with understanding staging and the working directory. The lightbulb moment for me was reading this article from Atlassian:

https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/resetting-checking-o...

Understanding that git reset --soft moves HEAD but doesn't change the staged snapshot or working directory, whilst --mixed updates the staged snapshot to match the commit but doesn't touch the working directory was very useful. And knowing that reset --hard updates both staging and the working directory to the commit was where I suddenly "got it".

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

#474

Post by piyush_soni »

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.

I thought it's nice too, and just downloaded it to find out it's Mac only.

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

#475

Post by dasil003 »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #442
dasil003 wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Git is fundamentally better than most of the alternatives No way. Only if you define “good” as “good at the kind of project that git is good at,” where it will hold vacuously. I suffer daily through the cyst that is git LFS, and it’s a joke. It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic. I hear that it’s not doing any better in large scale mono repo land. Google doesn’t use it, afaik. Microsoft does (but multi repo, la…

That's a fair criticism for sure, git makes tradeoffs that fall apart with large repos. You can, however, go a whole career without those things being a problem. Most code repositories are simply not that big.

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

#476

Post by MaulingMonkey »

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 think anyone who uses the CLI is either trying too hard or hasn't realized the beauty of a git GUI.

I've suffered a lot of git GUI bugs. The admittedly large repositories I sometimes deal with cause things to hang and stall, breaking my flow. I keep filing bug reports - truncated diffs because new files were "too large" (presumably someone trying to fix the hang and stall issue), a client that only renders the top half of the window consistently when on a portrait 4K monitor, etc.

The git CLI is simply second nature enough to me at this point that waiting for a GUI to load, refresh, etc. is rarely faster. It does happen, but it's not the common case. Getting a good summary of a set of changes is sometimes one of them. Picking individual hunks/lines is sometimes another - although I prefer to commit with such frequency when using git, that it's extremely rare I have changes that belong in different commits.

Then, looking at perforce, I'm finding more and more cases where I'm dropping out of P4V and into command line tools. Any kind of mass move/edit seems easier to do through the command line. Command line diffs were way easier to review than P4V's file based diff interface when I had changes involving 1 or 2 line tweaks spread across dozens to hundreds of files (such as verifying function rename changelists didn't accidentally pick up other changes.)

I think anyone who's swayed by the beauty of a git GUI has much more patience than me.

"Sourcetree (Not Responding)" - I typed this out while waiting for my Visual Rust tab to focus. Euhg.

I could've made a commit from the command line in that amount of time.

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

#477

Post by archon810 »

filereaper wrote: post #243
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'd like to also point out tig. "Tig is an ncurses-based text-mode interface for git" It doesn't have all the bells and whistles of a GUI, but if you need to look at all the branches, and commits to a repository. tig is an excellent tool. tig doesn't issue any commands though, its only a browser, you'll still need to know the CLI. (essentially a ncurses version of gitk) I'm normally in a ssh session on a remote box w…

+1 for tig. I'm also a big fan.

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

#478

Post by archon810 »

Vel0cityX wrote: post #330
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 SmartGit. Way faster and more stable than SourceTree and GitKraken, in my experience.

+1 for SmartGit, and SmartSVN if you ever use SVN.

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

#479

Post by aalleavitch »

dotancohen wrote: post #347
emodendroket wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just pushes the current branch afaik.

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

In its defense, git terminology is stupid. It took me way too long to reason out what the fuck a pull request meant. To your starting developer it seems to indicate the opposite of what it does.

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

#480

Post by danmaz74 »

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…

Some git guis log the git commands they execute. Just look at those.
Post reply on HN