> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:openocd- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Pete Batard > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 6:26 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] git gui > > On 2011.10.26 06:07, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Peter Stuge<[email protected]> wrote: > >> jim norris wrote: > >>> For those using a git gui, what are you using? > >> > >> On which system? > >> > >> For Windows, there is Git Extensions and TortoiseGit. The Git > >> Extensions looked less slick than TortoiseGit last time I looked, but > >> TortoisGit on the other hand lacked fundamental functionality. > > > > I recommend Gerrit. Gerrit makes a lot of the nastier concepts, > > like interactive rebasing and communication easier. > > > > From my experience TortoiseGit is a step down the wrong path. > > > > It makes things easier than possible, i.e. it tosses hard concepts > > out of the window. Where is the interactive rebase functionality? > > You mean, this [1]? > > For the record, I have been using TortoiseGit pretty much on a daily > basis, for almost two years now and from my personal experience, not > only have I found it filling pretty much all of my git needs (besides, > it's based on msys-git, so commandline git is only one click away), but > also, unlike Peter, I found that if there's one tool that benefits > greatly from having a solid GUI, it has to be git. Who'd want to go back > to using commandline for diffs, log, or branch switching, when you have > a GUI with *easy* navigation at your fingertips [2]?. > > Also, judging from the general praise for gerrit, which also provides a > solid GUI frontend albeit web based (hence more complex for regular git > users to setup on their own -- I wouldn't advocate it as a solution for > a user who simply wants a GUI on their machine), I can only assume that > many have come to share the view that some GUI ontop of git actually > does wonders. > > Thus, do you guys, who seem to be opposed to the use of TortoiseGit, > have better evidence to back up your claims? > > If not, I would advise Jim to take Øyvind and Peter's advice with a > grain of salt, or at least also consider the advice of someone who, > through nearly two years of continuous usage, has reason to believe that > using TortoiseGit has actually increased their git productivity. Of > course, just like Peter and Øyvind's, this is merely an opinion. > > Regards, > > /Pete > > [1] http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/697/tgitinteractiverebase.png > [2] http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/3281/tgitdiff.png > _______________________________________________ > Openocd-development mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
I guess TortoiseGit has come a long way since I last looked. I have seen it corrupt a repository[1], but that could be a known bug that's long- fixed. I've always used Git on the command line, and when trying to use Mercurial, I find it's command-line interface quite irritating in how much it doesn't do. I generally use the Git command-line interface alongside gitk, using gitk like a GPS navigator of the repo history; It shows me where I've been, where I am now, and gives me easy quick reference to where I want to be, making command line tools far more palatable. I do use the "git gui blame" tool. I also mentioned git gui before; It seems to lack functionality upon first look, but has excellent display and browsing ability. - Alex _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
