Git

3661 readers
9 users here now

Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency.

Resources

Rules

  1. Follow programming.dev rules
  2. Be excellent to each other, no hostility towards users for any reason
  3. No spam of tools/companies/advertisements. It’s OK to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the community should not be self-promotion.

Git Logo by Jason Long is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
201
202
 
 

Over the last year I've been trying to understand why GPG isn't popular. Based on the features I think it's a pretty valid thing. This article changed my mind.

Turns out GPG is too old ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I like signing my commits, it feels good to know that my identity is actually attached to my code. So I put in some work to reconfigure git to use a different signing tool, I didn't think it would be such a big deal, turns out git fully intergrates GPG. I'm confused. Why does git need to be hardcoded to use GPG specifically?

What rule says we can't have git configs like:

[sigining]
  defaultMethod=minisign

[signing.minisign]
  always=true
  signCommand=minisign -S -s {secret-key-file} -x {sig-file-name} -m {target-file}
  verifyCommand=minisign -V -P {public-key-file} -m {target-file}

Where the verifyCommand exits 0 if the signature is good and 1 if not.

I'm open to hearing cons. These are some I can think of:

  • User's have to configure git with each signing and verifying program
  • Upstream security conserns from signing programs
  • Signing programs changing their interfaces
203
204
205
206
13
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by otl@lemmy.sdf.org to c/git@programming.dev
 
 

With Github so popular now, not everyone is aware of the workflows that git provides out-of-the-box for collaboration. Thought this may pique some people's curiosity :)

207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
 
 

One of my main gripes regarding git is that it just generates diffs per line regardless of context or document format. This can be frustrating as it often leads to diffs that cover the end of a function declaration that was not touched and leaves out the end of a function that was just added.

Git supports diff options such as patience and histogram but , even though they mitigate some problems, they are still fallible.

So does anyone know if there is any way to get git to do context- or document format-sensitive diffs?

217
218
 
 

I'm looking for a web-based client, like git gui for choosing files to stage and to make commits. The actual files in the git repo would be edited elsewhere, so that is taken care of, but my google-fu is letting me down in this endeavour of finding the actual client.

There is a metric ton of repo browsers, and that would be fine, as long as they also could show status and diffs from a git repo and being able to commit.

Anyone have any pointers to anything a web git client? Thanks!

219
220
221
222
223
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/1352760

Was digging through a project at work today where some guy in 2014 made 100+ commits in a single day and the only one that had a comment said "upgrading to v4.0".

224
225
 
 

My account was flagged because I forked and contributed to the project Eaglercraft, and that means my account is basically useless. I have had enough of Microsoft's exploitation of power and want to switch to another alternative.

I tried GitLab, but I need to signup with a credit card and I am not comfortable giving my personal info out.
I tried Gitea and the experience is great, but I am limited to 5 repos. I tried Source Forge, but I cannot verify my phone number when creating a repo. The prompt just returns an API error.

What other alternative should I try?

view more: ‹ prev next ›