| ▲ | tombert 13 hours ago |
| Maybe it's Stockholm syndrome for me, but I never really understood what was so unusable about the vanilla command line git interface. If you want to do some really advanced stuff, sure it's a little arcane, but the vast majority of stuff that people use in git is easy enough. Branching and committing and merging never seemed that hard to me. |
|
| ▲ | SoftTalker 13 hours ago | parent [-] |
| Wnen I do anything more than commit/push/pull at the command line I will quickly get myself so confused that I end up deleting the directory and cloning it again. That doesn't happen to me (much) with magit. |
| |
| ▲ | tombert 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Fair enough. I feel like I do a fair amount of the more advanced features (interactive add and rebase, bisect, worktrees) without any fancy tooling and I don't have a problem much anymore, but admittedly they did confuse me at first. | | |
| ▲ | em-bee 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | i don't remember confusion. i find it's mostly understanding the data model and in particular the branches and references/reflog. when i am worried i might break something then i tag the the checkout where i am at and i know i can always revert to that. i also compare the original with the new state. i usually know what that diff should look like, and even if the operations in between are confusing, if the diff looks like what i expect then i know it went all right. trust the process but verify the results. the big thing i am missing from it is a branch history. a record for every commit to which branch it once belonged to. no improved interface can fix that. that would have to be added to the core of git. |
|
|