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

GitHub CLI 1.0

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 221 posts

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#141

Post by narwally »

albatruss wrote: post #136
narwally wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Emacs for a decade and still have never had to write a single package of my own. Every time I have a good idea, someone else has already implemented it.

Consider donating -- if you're a software engineer, acknowledge the value of your own time!

I donate little bits here and there when I can, but I'm unfortunately not in financial position to give what I think the maintainers deserve. Instead I try to submit documentation patches to projects whenever I find myself digging through the source code trying to answer a question the docs didn't make clear.

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#142

Post by mikorym »

SergeAx wrote: post #126

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their own shell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

I think the simple way of passive resistance is calling it "Microsoft GitHub".

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#143

Post by rs999gti »

_ph_ wrote: post #23
shaky wrote: post #6

I don't understand the appeal of using a cli to manage commits, branches, remotes, merges with conflicts, and so on. To me all these things are so much better internalized and understood when presented visually. Git GUIs are aplenty (Sublime Merge being my latest discovery, SourceTree before that) and generally really good. Combined with the already amazing GitHub web GUI, it's a wonder what use case is better served…

Besides the obvious advantages of command line user interfaces for a lot of use cases, I am not aware of any really good Git GUI. Can you name any for Linux or Mac OS? Commercial would be ok, as long as it can be installed locally and does not require a server.

I like GitHub desktop

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#144

Post by chadly »

SergeAx wrote: post #126

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their own shell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

This is a tired take. Can a company not legitimately improve their product/offering without this being accused at them?

If you are referring to GH being owned by MS now, it's 2020 for godsake. Can we move on from our fathers' trauma? MS has been damn good lately in support of developers and developer tools.

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#145

Post by narwally »

gumby wrote: post #132
chungus wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Been meaning to try Forge, thanks for the reminder. Honestly, Magit alone is enough reason to use Emacs. Projectile is a close second for me.

I find projectile too chatty and distracting none thing I like about emacs is that I can focus on what I’m working on.

In what way do you find it too chatty? That hasn't been my experience, but I do use a pretty small subset of it. Are you using it on its own, or with helm/ivy?

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#147

Post by tus88 »

SergeAx wrote: post #126

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their own shell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

And wait until they claim it is to "improve the user experience" because they care about their users so much they need to protect them from the free and familiar tools they are used to.

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#149

Post by Klonoar »

chadly wrote: post #144
SergeAx wrote: post #126

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their own shell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

This is a tired take. Can a company not legitimately improve their product/offering without this being accused at them? If you are referring to GH being owned by MS now, it's 2020 for godsake. Can we move on from our fathers' trauma? MS has been damn good lately in support of developers and developer tools.

I get just as tired of reading this take as the next person, but I don't necessarily think we should do away with it - it'd be akin to ignoring history.

I personally remain very uncomfortable with how massive GitHub has become and how ~99% of software development happens on the platform.

Re: GitHub CLI 1.0

#150

Post by narwally »

Scarbutt wrote: post #84
algorithmsRcool wrote: post #78

GitHub is killing it with these features. I wonder how long Azure Repos will survive on it's own.

And Golang is killing it for these kind of applications.

I haven't done much beyond dip my toes in Golang so far, but I did start moving my blog over from Jekyll to Hugo last week; Man do I love just being able to install a single binary and then get to work. Python, Javascript, and Ruby have a lot of nice packages, but I always have to futz around with the language itself to use them effectively. It's probably a bit easier to get a project up and running in a scripting language, but any development time that is saved just gets passed on to the users as we have to install a ton of npm packages or try to fix our gem dependencies.
Post reply on HN