There is no reason for any developer to not know git well. No fucking reason. Stop making shit harder for everyone by being like “oh I’m not the keenest on git” STFU and just learn it better you pussy.

i honestly can't tell if your account is AI spam or not, because boy, if you are real, you go through INCREDIBLE mood swings.

I also dislike git as a code revision manager, because it's incredibly complex and isn't useful for smaller projects, but it also makes large multi-person projects a nightmare to manage. it also tends to breed a culture of "you get ONE commit at a time, so if you have many small ones, you better rebase, because who the fuck cares about granual changes?" and then you have to re-explain everything you already documented in those smaller changes.

Bro i worked in a team where a SENIOR engineer uses the GUI git program on windows and clicks buttons to commit and push changes to git. She doesnt know how to do it via terminal. And shes the lead senior engineer in the team

@b2plane and why should you know how to use git cli exactly? Gui is perfectly fine.

@b2plane

Knowing git fetch/commit/pull/push ain't exactly knowing git CLI either.

Using CLI or GUI for everyday usage is a choice, not a basis for retarded elitism.

@Lensflare cherry picking, rebase, reverting broken merges, reverting back to the last stable commit because some fuck who doesn't know git decided to commit a bazillion times, or made one monster commit and fucked something up.

Hell, you been down the "let's merge the wrong branch" road?

@Parzi git is complicated, but the average user only needs to know a handful of commands to be practical with it.

- clone
- checkout
- push
- pull
- merge
- commit

"Git is hard", yet im supposed to accept the fact you learnt and can use programming languages , but a utility is beyond you?

@C0D4 yeah, a git gui client can do all of that.

@Lensflare 👀 I'm yet to see a git gui allow cherry picking and head resetting.

But I'll admit I don't go out of my way to use a gui, I dont use the cli to be "a pro dev", im typically on remote servers and only have the cli to use, so learning another util is just part of the day job.

@C0D4 Fork can do everything. Best git client. Sourcetree can do it too but is annoying and buggy sometimes.
Just stay away from Tortoise Git

@Parzi yeah the whole thing with git is that it manages history WAYYY better than any version tracking system I have used. It is incredibly flexible if you know how it works and provides a rigid system on how people contribute to the codebases in question. Plus the fine grained element of it is on purpose to give the user total control of their work. The potentials with how it is used to combine work together is infinite.

One thing I don't like about git gui clients is that they tend to have creative names for some git actions, for example: stage instead of add, discard instead of reset... So being a git cli user I won't know what command exactly will be executed if I click that one button...

@b2plane she is smarter than you, if she doesn’t break anything.

@chonky-quiche Ideally, yes. In practice, it's not very useful for small projects except maybe for distribution, as having one or two files max in a repo is likely going to result in more overhead than project, and git is often made useless by how large projects force you to use it. Having to make giant changes in small increments in a fork, commit all your changes incrementally over three weeks, and then being told to rebase 350+ commits into one with a max of 80 characters of commit message, wiping out all your reasoning and issue history and the like is literally the opposite of what git is for, but oops, 90% of large (i.e. >4 people, >10 files) work like that, all in service of "cleaner looking pull requests" or some shit like that.

@C0D4 I never said it was beyond me. I use it plenty. I just hate it, for reasons i've outlined twice now.

@Parzi It sounds like you don’t have that much exposure to different git flows

1) the process you are describing sounds like user error. That is definitely **the minority** of how people use it. Sounds like your org needs to work on adopting a new PR and git process or maybe just learn how to manage code better…

2) it can be very useful for small files. Especially if it is a running documentation in an org. For example, you could see the person who made a particular change and maybe ask them why they made that change. You can see how certain updates evolve the file over time. I don’t understand why you don’t think this is a downside.

It doesn’t sound like you are making any valid points besides “I don’t like it”

@chonky-quiche i'm not referring to any particular org, i'm referring to the vast majority of public projects. "user error" on a vast scale isn't exactly the same as one user or org having the issue, no?

additionally, documentation can benefit from it, yes, but a small utility you throw together to fix a small annoyance or something similar won't benefit much from using git. typically, I define a "small project" as somewhere in the realm of like 100KB of total code at most.

@Parzi I now get what ur saying but I still think it’s still a minority which actually have bad git practices.

If you don't know git and but you are angry how git sucks, all 300 elite developers should throw you into a bottomless pit.

@C0D4 It will get pretty hard to add (pun intended) anything to a git project with just this commands.

And i would also suggest to learn how rebase works. diff and log are also very useful commands.

@b2plane it's like Dropbox!

@b2plane I don't see nothing wrong with this. As soon as she does her shit well, it doesn't matter if it's by console or GUI

I agree and keep malding about my company's NOT-USAGE of git.

I literally set up a gitea instance on one of our servers just so I could use git.

It's not "just" GIT what one should learn imho.

It's what GIT does and why GIT is necessary....

I always crave violence when one argues for example: "GIT sucks so much we shouldn't use it". Note that they're dead serious about it - when you ask them "What VCS (version control system) should we use instead?" they answer dead seriously: "who needs a VCS?".

We might not always like what tools we are given and I can understand that GIT is complex - but despite that, GIT or a VCS is absolutely necessary.

Learning it is imho a basic, mandatory, skill. Doesn't matter if GUI or console.

Learn it. Understand it. Use it correctly.

It's your daily bread and butter, for fucks sake.

@happygimp0 we can't be giving away all the secrets.

if they can't manage to commit and branch at a minimum, I'm not really going to be interested in what ever hell they do add.

@C0D4 commit without add doesn't make much sense in most cases (you can create empty commits and there are cases where they make sense, but that is an exception).

@ostream yeah sure, I care so much for elitist cli users that I‘ll instantly uninstall my inferior UI and start typing everything with a keyboard. Sure it takes much more time and looks ugly, but hey, at least I‘ll be a real developer, like you!

@ostream There are different UI clients. Fork, for instance, looks much better than what you have posted (VS Git extensions I suppose). But ultimately it‘s a matter of taste.
And if it takes more time or less time is a matter of preference.

You find cli better? Good for you. But stop spreading that nonsense that "you must use git via cli otherwise you are a noob".
Or keep doing it and make yourself look like a noob.

@ostream Currently I‘m an iOS dev, so yes, a mac. With an awesome cli which I use regularly. Just not for git. Shocking, I know.

Now go on playing with you clown language JS and your superior cli, you pathetic troll.