←back to thread

Oh Shit, Git?

(ohshitgit.com)
464 points Anon84 | 3 comments | 16 Jan 25 18:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.645s | source
Show context
SebastianKra ◴[16 Jan 25 20:29 UTC] No.42730483[source]▶
We should start recommending UIs as the default way to learn Git. It would solve a third of these problems and another third wouldn't even come up.

If you later decide that the CLI is faster, go ahead. But first, people need to see visually how they can interact with the tree.

I like fork.dev, but most clients are pretty similar at this point.

replies(14): >>42731131 #>>42731315 #>>42731362 #>>42731414 #>>42731485 #>>42731663 #>>42731730 #>>42732771 #>>42732796 #>>42732944 #>>42734694 #>>42739237 #>>42740117 #>>42747946 #
nuancebydefault ◴[16 Jan 25 21:29 UTC] No.42731131[source]▶
The cli is faster if you know by heart but a real disadvantage is that it is hard to "see" what you did or what happened in the past. Good look finding where/whether an old branch got merged and find out if it is part of a release, using cli.
replies(1): >>42733425 #
1. harrall ◴[17 Jan 25 02:26 UTC] No.42733425[source]▶
Is this really true? When I want to reorder commits, I just drag & drop in a GUI and I’m done. Or if I want to switch branch or manage a complex mix of rebases or cherry picks, it’s just 2 or 3 clicks. In CLI, by the time I’ve typed out the commit hash or locator, it’s already taken longer. And I type 130 words per minute.
replies(1): >>42733660 #
2. dijksterhuis ◴[17 Jan 25 03:03 UTC] No.42733660[source]▶
> by the time I’ve typed out the commit hash

i don’t think i’ve typed out a full hash in … years? if i have i’ve used the short 8 character hash.

git rev-parse might be something useful to have a look at, especially when combined with aliases.

replies(1): >>42733981 #
3. harrall ◴[17 Jan 25 04:11 UTC] No.42733981[source]▶
Nah I’m talking about the short hash.

But I still have to find the short hash too, and then copy or re-type it… With a UI, I just… click click click done.