Live data from Hacker News

How Core Git Developers Configure Git

blog.gitbutler.com

1–10 of 129 posts

Re: How Core Git Developers Configure Git

#2
Wow this is neat. I never really bothered to deep-dive into my git configuration, but some of these are really cool.

The diff changes are awesome, and I always wondered why there isn't a global .gitignore file in the first place, seeing that every .gitignore file basically has (mostly) the same content

Re: How Core Git Developers Configure Git

#3

Wow this is neat. I never really bothered to deep-dive into my git configuration, but some of these are really cool. The diff changes are awesome, and I always wondered why there isn't a global .gitignore file in the first place, seeing that every .gitignore file basically has (mostly) the same content

[deleted]

Re: How Core Git Developers Configure Git

#4

Wow this is neat. I never really bothered to deep-dive into my git configuration, but some of these are really cool. The diff changes are awesome, and I always wondered why there isn't a global .gitignore file in the first place, seeing that every .gitignore file basically has (mostly) the same content

I mentioned it in the post as well, but Git will look in `.config/git/ignore` if you prefer to just use that rather than setting a new path.

There's also a possible downside here in having things hidden for you but not for others since it's not in your `.gitignore` project file.

I'm honestly kind of on the fence about this one, I don't have much in that file for those reasons.

Re: How Core Git Developers Configure Git

#6

Wow this is neat. I never really bothered to deep-dive into my git configuration, but some of these are really cool. The diff changes are awesome, and I always wondered why there isn't a global .gitignore file in the first place, seeing that every .gitignore file basically has (mostly) the same content

I prefer difftastic (https://github.com/Wilfred/difftastic) as diff tool.

I think it's the most readable and understandable diff.

Re: How Core Git Developers Configure Git

#8
> Default branch

> Personally, I don’t have a problem with master

> updating the default value. I wish Git had some taste here, but they don't

So author has no preference, but git does not have a good taste here, for not breaking backward compatibility. Typical passive agresive bullshit!

I think "main" is not inclusive enough, we should use something like "non-specific-but-strong-branch". Or something that includes even stronger message. And change it every year (or month). It could be automated using github actions on all existing repos!

Also please rename "git" command, it is very insensitive word!!!

Post reply on HN