It saves snapshots of you git history. So we have version control... for our version control? Slick.
GitUp makes Git painless
111–120 of 260 posts
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#112I realize this is a pretty broad question, but what is it about Git that people find painful ? Could be Stockholm Syndrome on my part, but I have a pretty hard time understanding why someone can't spend a week getting up to speed with a tool they intend to use for years to come.
unknown unknowns. Odd choices for flags and commands. Inability to search for explanations of some commands.
These are all valid commands that do radically different things:
git checkout patch git checkout --patch git checkout -- patchYet, googling to find the difference is difficult (because search engines). If, eventually, you decide to search for 'dash dash', you'll start to find good results.
So, if a user had a file named 'patch' that they want to 'revert' back to the last committed version, they might try the first one (after all, it works for 'git checkout somefile.txt'). But IF they have a branch named patch, it would attempt to switch to it. It might succeed, it might fail, depending on the state of the tree, giving a very strange message compared to what the user wanted to do.
Despite it's ubiquity in the man pages, I haven't been able to find 'official' documentation or explanation for it, rather a bunch of blog posts and stack overflow questions. I find it hard to believe that a user who spent their time reading through docs and man pages would be able to work out the meaning on their own.
This is one example, but there are a TON of examples in StackOverflow as to what people find difficult. Most of my git knowledge comes from having to fix something that went awry. It's hard to 'spend a week getting up to speed' on a tool whose sole purpose is to manage other work.
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#113It's kind of amusing to me how the pendulum has swung, and we're now producing OS X-only developer software. But then, I'm an oddball who works on Windows as my shell with the real work happening on a headless Linux box via SSH and Samba for 99% of my development.
You're not the only oddball. Some of us work on Windows software and NEED the Windows box -- I also use too many Windows-only tools to make the jump to Mac.
And what they do with Cmd-vs-Alt drives my fingers crazy, so I can't configure a Mac to be sane no matter what I try. And I use keyboard navigation to peruse menus, which OS X still hasn't implemented...the list goes on, and I stick with Windows.
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#114I realize this is a pretty broad question, but what is it about Git that people find painful ? Could be Stockholm Syndrome on my part, but I have a pretty hard time understanding why someone can't spend a week getting up to speed with a tool they intend to use for years to come.
I rather like the visualisation that gitk gives me, though. I'll never use a GUI to manipulate the tree, but to visualise it, it's very useful.
I make an alias for in-terminal viz.
[alias]
hist = log --graph --pretty=format:'%C(auto)%h%d%C(reset) - %s %C(bold blue)(%cr by %an)' --abbrev-commit
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#115I realize this is a pretty broad question, but what is it about Git that people find painful ? Could be Stockholm Syndrome on my part, but I have a pretty hard time understanding why someone can't spend a week getting up to speed with a tool they intend to use for years to come.
The fact 3 of the top 5 questions of all time on Stack Overflow are for basic Git operations tells you something: http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=votes . IMO this all boils down to the Git CLI just being terrible e.g. “git add” to stage versus “git reset HEAD” to unstage. Pretty much everything is like that. And there are always edge cases so that a command works in this case but not in that one. Want to edit…
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I suppose if you use a tool frequently enough, you become blind to its warts :-)
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#116I realize this is a pretty broad question, but what is it about Git that people find painful ? Could be Stockholm Syndrome on my part, but I have a pretty hard time understanding why someone can't spend a week getting up to speed with a tool they intend to use for years to come.
The fact 3 of the top 5 questions of all time on Stack Overflow are for basic Git operations tells you something: http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=votes . IMO this all boils down to the Git CLI just being terrible e.g. “git add” to stage versus “git reset HEAD” to unstage. Pretty much everything is like that. And there are always edge cases so that a command works in this case but not in that one. Want to edit…
Considering the top 5 questions of all time on SO for most technologies are trivial/basic cases or homework. Yeah, when I first used Git I had to look things up.
Now that I use Git daily a tool like this seems like a terrible plan. I don't even trust basic scripts for git commands I haven't written/read totally, something which I'm not prepared to do for this tool.
>Anyway, with GitUp, the idea is to have an interactive live map instead
I like the idea of a live map, but the "interactive" part seems silly.
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I simply don't understand this recent tendency to launch on Mac first. Out of the big 3 (Linux, Windows, Mac), Mac is by far the worst platform to launch on because you have to buy hardware. Please can we stop it now. Just launch on Linux - everyone can access Linux no matter whether they are PC or Mac.
The Mac is a phenomenal platform to launch right now if you make software targeted at developers. There's huge growth in mobile development, and many mobile developers work on OS X. Not just iOS developers, I'm seeing lots of Android devlopers working on Macs too recently. And if you make a new tool, you should go where the young (in the sense of experience, not age) developers are. Experienced developers already hav…
>Experienced developers already have their workflows all set up and don't try new tools as often.
Speak for yourself. I'm always trying new tools as they come available, and was thinking that GitUp would be a fun one to add to my toolset. And then I saw "Mac Only" and groaned. I don't own a Mac, and though I will likely buy one soon (for iOS dev reasons), it will always remain my ugly-stepchild dev box, that I own only to do Xcode builds, not any serious development work.
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#118It's kind of amusing to me how the pendulum has swung, and we're now producing OS X-only developer software. But then, I'm an oddball who works on Windows as my shell with the real work happening on a headless Linux box via SSH and Samba for 99% of my development.
+1 I was going to make a rather sarcastic comment that this is for "professional engineers", but is OS X only. Ubuntu on a VirtualBox on Windows for me.
How do you resolve 'executable' files in your VM?
I've not been able to run node apps because executables end up getting stored in /node_modules/, but if that is on a windows share, no executable flag is stored.
Resolving the FS differences has always been the biggest pain for me using windows as the core OS.
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#119It's kind of amusing to me how the pendulum has swung, and we're now producing OS X-only developer software. But then, I'm an oddball who works on Windows as my shell with the real work happening on a headless Linux box via SSH and Samba for 99% of my development.
Could someone comment on the main complications on developing something like this for both Mac and Linux? From my point of view, they is so much common ground, comparing to a Mac/Windows support, that I'd strive for an application to cover both! And that's not something that you could always decide after launching the first time, you need to have it in consideration during design...
Re: GitUp makes Git painless
#120It's kind of amusing to me how the pendulum has swung, and we're now producing OS X-only developer software. But then, I'm an oddball who works on Windows as my shell with the real work happening on a headless Linux box via SSH and Samba for 99% of my development.
Could someone comment on the main complications on developing something like this for both Mac and Linux? From my point of view, they is so much common ground, comparing to a Mac/Windows support, that I'd strive for an application to cover both! And that's not something that you could always decide after launching the first time, you need to have it in consideration during design...
The GUI systems are utterly different, so, for a GUI tool like this, you'd have to write the front-end twice. I don't think OS X and Linux are especially closer to each other than either with Windows when you're in that department.