Oh Shit, Git?

(ohshitgit.com)

464 points Anon84 | 1 comments | 16 Jan 25 18:24 UTC | HN request time: 0s | 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 #

paulddraper ◴[17 Jan 25 06:31 UTC] No.42734694[source]▶

>>42730483 #

What the average amount of time until something goes wrong that can't be fixed in the UI?

replies(2): >>42735161 #>>42736324 #

1. OkayPhysicist ◴[17 Jan 25 11:11 UTC] No.42736324[source]▶

>>42734694 #

In more than one team I've been on over the years, I was the only person with a deep understanding of Git. What I've found as a result of being the "oh shit git" guy is that

1) all UIs are completely missing at least some of Git CLI's functionality (shoutout to git's most neglected feature, git notes)

2) all UIs have at least a couple git features so tucked away that you'll only find them if you know to look for them (git checkout -- path > temp_file is a common culprit here, but I've seen UIs that hide git ammend)

3) the average time for a UI-exclusive user to need my help for one of those two reasons was about a month.

↑