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

New in Git: switch and restore

banterly.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 550 posts

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#81

Post by aetherspawn »

benglish11 wrote: post #79
aetherspawn wrote: post #73

A lot of comments along the lines of ‘why do people use instead of learning the commands’. For me, I used to use the terminal git, and I still do occasionally. But I use Sourcetree now for most things because I make less mistakes seeing the tree visually all the time. My job isn’t to use git, it’s to write specialist software. If I get the software written and the customer is happy, it doesn’t matter whether I use or…

For me I’ve used visual git tools in the past and it ends up doing something unintended/unexpected. So now I only use the terminal commands. Perhaps the old git tools I’ve used have improved significantly though.

I prefer to rebase on the terminal also, but I reference Sourcetree when doing it.

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#82

Post by oauea »

aetherspawn wrote: post #73

A lot of comments along the lines of ‘why do people use instead of learning the commands’. For me, I used to use the terminal git, and I still do occasionally. But I use Sourcetree now for most things because I make less mistakes seeing the tree visually all the time. My job isn’t to use git, it’s to write specialist software. If I get the software written and the customer is happy, it doesn’t matter whether I use or…

All visual git tools I've used suck and wound up eventually corrupting the repo. Also I've noticed that all of my colleagues who learned git using these visual tools didn't actually learn git, and have no idea how to anything other than add/commit/push.

I say "just rebase your branch" and I can see the panic grow in their eyes.

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#83

Post by intellix »

aetherspawn wrote: post #73

A lot of comments along the lines of ‘why do people use instead of learning the commands’. For me, I used to use the terminal git, and I still do occasionally. But I use Sourcetree now for most things because I make less mistakes seeing the tree visually all the time. My job isn’t to use git, it’s to write specialist software. If I get the software written and the customer is happy, it doesn’t matter whether I use or…

I wouldn't say I'm an expert but I've got about 10 years experience using git via CLI and whenever a noob does something weird and he's using an IDE I'm like... Sorry I have zero idea what this is trying to do and cannot help you

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#84

Post by makeitdouble »

Vinnl wrote: post #3

It's not really new anymore, but still way underused, so it could certainly do with more attention. Git's UI has become better, but they can't really remove the old UI and tutorials using those, so people keep sticking to that.

These new commands make a lot more sense, but the weird thing is they don’t bring anything else to the table. They behave exactly like the existing ones, so much that anyone that really cared could have just aliased them.

So is there any incentive to switch for the people who went through the trauma of burning the old ones in their soul ? (I often heard that knowing how it works internally makes git commands feel natural. I was lied to)

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#85

Post by makeitdouble »

lucb1e wrote: post #24
cybersvenn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of one confusing command we now have three confusing commands.

I don't find switch or restore confusing? And also I never found checkout confusing, but that might only have been because I never realized it had multiple functions. I've been using it for both things (switching and restoring) for years, but I remember starting to read the article and thinking: how did I never notice this is the same command for two completely different things?! Maybe I used to know and now it's jus…

Arguably there is some semantic overlap between restore and reset.

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#86

Post by Vinnl »

easygenes wrote: post #5
Vinnl wrote: post #3

It's not really new anymore, but still way underused, so it could certainly do with more attention. Git's UI has become better, but they can't really remove the old UI and tutorials using those, so people keep sticking to that.

What would top recommendations be for tutorials using the newest UI?

We're commenting on one :) But really there's not much to it - `git checkout` is the main wart of Git's UI given how overloaded it is, and with `git switch` and `git restore`, you'll have banned out pretty much all of its regular use. And given how much more straightforward (i.e. they have more guessable arguments) those are, there's not as much need for tutorials anymore.

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#87

Post by Vinnl »

makeitdouble wrote: post #84
Vinnl wrote: post #3

It's not really new anymore, but still way underused, so it could certainly do with more attention. Git's UI has become better, but they can't really remove the old UI and tutorials using those, so people keep sticking to that.

These new commands make a lot more sense, but the weird thing is they don’t bring anything else to the table. They behave exactly like the existing ones, so much that anyone that really cared could have just aliased them. So is there any incentive to switch for the people who went through the trauma of burning the old ones in their soul ? (I often heard that knowing how it works internally makes git commands feel nat…

They don't behave exactly like the old ones, because they do less - which means it's harder to accidentally do the wrong thing, and it's easier to guess what its arguments do.

If you know the old ones already and don't make mistakes, it's fine not to use these, really. I consciously got the new commands into my muscle memory in case I'm pair programming or someone less familiar with Git is looking along.

And yeah, knowing how Git works makes it a lot easier to understand, but it doesn't make the commands more natural. (Except perhaps knowing when you can use a commit id instead of a branch name.)

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#88

Post by FunnyLookinHat »

intellix wrote: post #83
aetherspawn wrote: post #73

A lot of comments along the lines of ‘why do people use instead of learning the commands’. For me, I used to use the terminal git, and I still do occasionally. But I use Sourcetree now for most things because I make less mistakes seeing the tree visually all the time. My job isn’t to use git, it’s to write specialist software. If I get the software written and the customer is happy, it doesn’t matter whether I use or…

I wouldn't say I'm an expert but I've got about 10 years experience using git via CLI and whenever a noob does something weird and he's using an IDE I'm like... Sorry I have zero idea what this is trying to do and cannot help you

I've had similar experiences with git or other tools - not being able to help a junior dev because the GUI they're using is obfuscating whatever it is the underlying tool is trying to do. I think the irony is that we've got this insanely complex version control system that actually could have several valid use cases for what is likely a common path for users in a GUI.

I'm also not sure referring to people as "noobs" is going to help you empathize with their difficulty. ;)

Re: New in Git: switch and restore

#89

Post by tryingtogetback »

aetherspawn wrote: post #73

A lot of comments along the lines of ‘why do people use instead of learning the commands’. For me, I used to use the terminal git, and I still do occasionally. But I use Sourcetree now for most things because I make less mistakes seeing the tree visually all the time. My job isn’t to use git, it’s to write specialist software. If I get the software written and the customer is happy, it doesn’t matter whether I use or…

For me, as a dentist, I used to use the dental drill, but now I trust my janitor to handle it, this way I make less mistakes myself

My job as a dentist isn't to use dental drill, it's to fix teeth in general. If I managed to fix a tooth and customer is happy, it doesn't matter whether I use drill myself or janitor does. Imagine having 100 complex things bouncing around your head and having to make that 101 when you forget the order of drill bits you need for a root canal.

The guy who knows dental drilling backwards is welcome to apply for a job managing dental drills or something if such a thing exists? But I could harp on the same way about his missing medical or braces-training skills.

Post reply on HN