Love Tig, it's an instant go-to everyday for Getting Things Done™
Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
31–40 of 98 posts
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#32tig seems like it could be a cool tool, but trying to view screenshots (on ios latest safari) left me stuck on a flickr login screen. ):
See the video here
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#33I did not find any obvious screenshots in action when clicking around on the site. So, I won't bother investigating further. Maybe others would also like some prominent screenshots that show off why we may want to use/try this.
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#34I did not find any obvious screenshots in action when clicking around on the site. So, I won't bother investigating further. Maybe others would also like some prominent screenshots that show off why we may want to use/try this.
Uhm, you didn’t see the featured “Screenshots” item in the main navigation?
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the first thing that drove me initially to Emacs. I never found a Git client that well-crafted.
That's because most aren't designed as git porcelains. Magit enhances and, in some cases, replaces git's abstractions with its own. If a git frontend starts by taking git's own built-in porcelain as a given then it's already doomed to failure.
I've been using Magit for years, but I've never seen the use of "porcelain" as a jargon term to describe anything but Magit. Can you point me to a 'splaner on the use of that term? Googling hasn't gotten me anything but an insight to just how many people take porcelain (the pottery) very, very seriously.
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#36text-mode interface for Git Based on the comments here saying they love Tig, I know I'm missing something, but: doesn't Git provide a text interface (the `git` command) to Git? I'm not trying to be obtuse; I genuinely don't know what Tig provides that Git doesn't already do, but would love to know!
Tig provides a GUI that is text-based, i.e. runs right in your terminal. It's essentially a shell friendly version of sourcetree/tortoisegit etc. A great tool on its own, but particularly useful for headless servers/remote machines.
Interesting, thank you!
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#37text-mode interface for Git Based on the comments here saying they love Tig, I know I'm missing something, but: doesn't Git provide a text interface (the `git` command) to Git? I'm not trying to be obtuse; I genuinely don't know what Tig provides that Git doesn't already do, but would love to know!
tig is a curses program, it's an interactive terminal GUI (a TUI), as opposed to a CLI e.g. you can browse and interact with your log rather than dump it in a pager and need a separate terminal to dive into a commit or whatever. magit is a good alternative, it's not exactly a TUI because it works entirely inside emacs and uses emacs concepts, but it's entirely text-based.
Interesting, thank you! I think I need go learn more about what "curses" means
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#38a simple video demo/gif would be really cool to see what it does in one glance
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because most aren't designed as git porcelains. Magit enhances and, in some cases, replaces git's abstractions with its own. If a git frontend starts by taking git's own built-in porcelain as a given then it's already doomed to failure.
I've been using Magit for years, but I've never seen the use of "porcelain" as a jargon term to describe anything but Magit. Can you point me to a 'splaner on the use of that term? Googling hasn't gotten me anything but an insight to just how many people take porcelain (the pottery) very, very seriously.
https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Internals-Plumbing-and-Po...
tldr: git low-level commands are considered API and called "plumbing" (eg `git cat-file`, `git upload-pack`), otoh stuff like `git push` is porcelain: it's an ui layer.
Re: Tig – Text-mode interface for Git
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because most aren't designed as git porcelains. Magit enhances and, in some cases, replaces git's abstractions with its own. If a git frontend starts by taking git's own built-in porcelain as a given then it's already doomed to failure.
I've been using Magit for years, but I've never seen the use of "porcelain" as a jargon term to describe anything but Magit. Can you point me to a 'splaner on the use of that term? Googling hasn't gotten me anything but an insight to just how many people take porcelain (the pottery) very, very seriously.
It's a git specific terminology. The plumbing is low level stuff like creating objects etc (ie. DAG operations). The porcelain is high level stuff like "rebase" which is (supposedly) designed for human use.