I will install emacs on a machine just to use magit.
Programming
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
Off topic: day-after-day with these kinds of posts and especially the replies, I need Reddit less and less. That's a very good thing.
Sorry, guess the replies are too tame. Let me help you with that.
Anything more than the git
CLI is a joke. Real developers should know how to raw-dog that thing. If you're not octopus merging your rebased branches to deploy to prod, you're just not a real developer.
(I use gitui
)
Fair comment.
IANA developer at all. Mostly just keeping records of my dotfiles and odd bits I have playing with., and the experiments I try to run using branches. Sometimes I need a visual representation of the commits and hashes to make it easier to understand what I'm doing.
git is my only nemesis.
I have tortoise git on a windows machine and GitHub desktop on a Mac. I do some things from the command line when I'm not feeling lazy.
I'm an Emacs users, so unsurprisingly I use magit, but perhaps surprisingly I use it sparingly, using Emacs's VC most of the time.
Magit is what allowed me to finally commit to switching to Git full time.
It's such an excellent front-end for Git that I've known numerous workmates learn Emacs just to use Magit.
Is Vscode a git client?
No one take from me though idk what I'm doing when it comes to programming stuff.
It is. Not as advanced as others but it still is nonetheless!
Fork !!!
It's hands down the best git client.
It's free as in: sublime text or winzip where they ask you once a month if you want to pay for it but you can just select: I'm still trying it out, and it gets out of your way.
- It's got a well designed tree graph like in GitKraken except it doesn't lag
- It's interactive rebasing is as smooth as JJ / LazyGit, so you can edit/rename/reorder your commits except you don't have to have to remember CLI flags since it has its own UI
- It's lets you commit individual lines by selecting them instead of adding/removing whole hunks like Sourcetree except it isn't filled with paper cuts where a feature breaks in an annoying way for 2 years and you have to do extra steps to keep using it how you want.
And one killer feature that I haven't seen any other git clients handle: allowing me to stage only one side of the diff. As in: if I change a line (so it shows up as one removed line and one new line in git), I can decide to add the new line change while still keeping the old line.
So changing this:
doThing(1);
into this:
doThing(2);
Shows up in git as:
- doThing(1);
+ doThing(2);
But if I still want to keep doThing(1);
, I don't have to go back into my code to retype doThing(1);
, or do any manual copy-pasting. I can just highlight and add only doThing(2);
to the staging area and discard the change to doThing(1);
.
So now the code exists as:
doThing(1);
doThing(2);
Now with a one-liner example like this, we could always re-enter the code again. But for larger code changes? It's far easier to just highlight the code in the diff and say: yes to this and no to the other stuff.
And when you get used to it, it makes it really easy to split what would be large git commits into smaller related changes keeping your git history clean and easy to understand.
I love Fork, bought the license to support the developer.
The only thing I don’t like is that there is no Linux version, asked the dev and he told me that the issue with Linux is that there are different distros with different GUI libraries so it would require multiple versions for Linux.
A bit saddened it I completely understand.
I paid for it too!
It's the first piece of shareware I actually went out of my way to pay for because it was so good that I’d be genuinely pissed off if it died. I'd probably end up switching to pijul or something else for my projects if it ever did.
I've seen a bunch of people messing the windows version running in linux in the fork forums, so it may be coming in an unsupported capacity.
I’ll second Fork, it’s been my go to for years! Maybe I’ll pay for it one day
In case you're interested, git add <files> -p
allows you to do this on the command line. I use it daily.
Yeah, I use it when ssh'd into a server, but it's just so awkward to use.
Sometimes it just really doesn't want to separate a hunk. Other times you want to stage all lines except one, and you have to do a million splits just to target the lines you want to keep.
It'd be far easier if you could just select the lines you want to affect. It's literally the first feature shown in lazygit's readme. I think half the reason that people use lazygit is that partial commits are so awkward to perform in most other clients.
Luckily Fork does it as well as lazygit
I still don't think it's nearly as convenient as being able to just see the changes side by side and click the one you want (or both). You can even easily modify the final outcome in the 3rd preview panel, in case you need to do a quick fix after a conflict resolution.
CLI with some aliases for viewing commit history and branching, or less frequently an IDE plugin
When I learned Git I think there were not decent tools, so I got used to the command line.
I occasionally use gitk for reviewing my commits- it's nicer to see the files modified and be able to jump back and forth, although I get I could use git log -p
instead.
I'm an Emacs user, but I don't use magit (!)
I like some of the graphical tools- some colleagues use Fork and I like it... but as I've already learned the CLI, I don't see the point for me.
I could use learning some jj because it automates some of the most tedious parts of my workflow, but I'm getting too old.
Lazy git most of the time, sourcegit for heavy duty stuff.
Git Graph VS Code extension
I’ve used source tree, gitkraken, etc. this simple extension is just as good. I spend most my day with it
Git Graph VS Code extension
I’ve used source tree, gitkraken, etc. this simple extension is just as good. I spend most my day with it
Git cola
I use VSCode and SourceGit. SourceGit is similar to Fork (which I've used before), but it's FOSS and cross-platform (Windows/macOS/Linux).
GitKraken ❤️
If not present, vscode + gitlens
Vscode and gitlens for routine stuff, and then just CLI when push comes to shove and I need some more advanced feature.
i loved fork on windows but i'm too lazy to set up wine to try and get it to work now i just use git cola and the cli.
I use SourceGit as a Fork alternative on Linux, it's pretty similar
Tried idea community edition, honestly not bad, like vs code slightly more even tho with an extension or two you can make how they function very similar. Wanted to use idea because it matched the gtk theme, but if I was gonna use an extension for vs code like navigation might as well use vs code. Both easy to use with git as a dabbler.
vscode with edamagit and the cli
Lazygit and magit
LazyGit and GitKraken. I try to use LazyGit as much as possible, but a few things are easier for me in GitKraken (as I'm more used to it).
I made some automation in python for common git tasks and use the cli otherwise. I tried a couple like sourcetree and the built in automation for VS but they're either slow or lack features i'd like.
The cli because it is consistent everywhere and has all fearures
Same, because its UX is actually really good. Years ago when I was new to git, I tried to use Sourcetree to revert a merge commit, and it would just fail. When I tried it in the CLI, it still failed, but it told me how to fix it. (I needed to specify which parent)
That, plus it’s scriptable, plus I’m in the terminal a lot anyway. I’ll also use the IDE git client sometimes if that’s where I am at the moment.
Jah, mein fearures
The only thing I'm missing in the CLI is easy picking and choosing which change to include in a commit on a more fine grained basis than files. I sometimes have a changed file and the changes fix different issues and thus should get separate commits but with the CLI I can't easily select the changes to be staged. At least not AFAIK.
Edit: Richards law of posting something wrong to get fast correct answers seems to stay true, even on lemmy. Thanks for teaching me something today <3
I mostly use git from the console.
- git with a bunch of aliases for common operations and making the log pretty.
- gitk when I need a UI to browse the history
- kdiff3 as mergetool
Mostly Magit, some CLI
Same. Magit 99% of the time and CLI for the one percent where I need to run an obscure command. Magit is genuinely one of the best things in Emacs besides org mode.
TortoiseGit.
Through settings, I move the Show Log to the top context menu level, and it's my entry point to every Git operation.
I see a history tree to see and immediately understand commit and branch relationships and states. I can commit, show changes, diff, rebase interactive or not, push, fetch, switch, create branches and tags, squash and split commits, commit chunk-wise through "restet after commit", … And everything from a repo overview.
/edit: To add; other clients I tried never reached what I want from a UI/GUI, never reached TortoiseGit. Including IDE integrations where I'm already in the IDE; I prefer the separate better TortoiseGit.
GitButler is interesting for it's different approach, but when I tried it out the git auth didn't remember my key password. (Since trying out jj I found out it may have been due to disabled OpenSSH Service.)
I have a love-hate relationship with it. Due to work reasons I'm more familiar than I want to be with tortoiseSVN, and the git version is similar enough to feel at home. But that's also it's biggest downfall: it does a lot of things the "SVN way" despite being a git client. The workflow can be kinda made to work, but it always feels like it's not a native git tool, because it isn't. I would go so far as to say that it encouragedrl bad habits on git, especially for those used to tortoiseSVN.
What do you mean in particular?
The only thing that comes to mind for me is the "restore after commit" being a different chunk-add workflow than add --patch
- but I don't think it's worse.
Fork on windows, SourceGit on Linux, both have a similar UI layout to SourceTree, but are much faster/snappier.
I really like having a clear overview of the commit history, branches and current local state. I haven't figured out yet how to get such an "at a glance" overview in the CLI.
For advanced stuff the CLI is still very convenient.
I second Fork, been using it for years and it's fast, able to handle multiple actions at once. Can't recommend it enough!