Zero-configuration submodules with auto-update in Gitbox(gitboxapp.com)
gitboxapp.com
Zero-configuration submodules with auto-update in Gitbox
http://gitboxapp.com/?submodules
4 comments
Oleg, your vision is exactly what I like about Gitbox. Git is a toolbox to create your own VCS, Gitbox takes a stance and uses those tools to define a usage model, without tying itself to tradition.
It doesn't work for hardcore users and even I sometimes fall back (cringing) to the CLI, but I really appreciate it.
Feature request: easier way to switch local and remote branches with the keyboard. Currently I use Cmd-Shift-? to get to the menu.
It doesn't work for hardcore users and even I sometimes fall back (cringing) to the CLI, but I really appreciate it.
Feature request: easier way to switch local and remote branches with the keyboard. Currently I use Cmd-Shift-? to get to the menu.
Nothing against gitbox but I find it a bit of a tragedy that they can advertise with making submodules bearable in first place.
This stuff really needs an overhaul in core-git. The CLI experience is indeed so terrible that most people avoid submodules altogether.
This stuff really needs an overhaul in core-git. The CLI experience is indeed so terrible that most people avoid submodules altogether.
My personal problem with git was inherent inefficiency of CLI. E.g. I was typing "gs" to see the status almost after every little command. In Gitbox you just see the status. Similar thing with submodules: you need to get in and out, verify the status of a submodule and its parent. In Gitbox you just see the whole picture and click a single button to do something useful.
My question is not to git CLI guys (they are doing great job, by the way), but to others like Tower and SourceTree: why in the world they complicate things so much? If one needs a very flexible/configurable environment, git CLI is just fine.
My question is not to git CLI guys (they are doing great job, by the way), but to others like Tower and SourceTree: why in the world they complicate things so much? If one needs a very flexible/configurable environment, git CLI is just fine.
To me the CLI is about fine. It's just the submodules that are poorly executed and break all sorts of expectations.
The mini-primer on submodule-WTFs: "must be executed in root-directory", no auto-clone/update of submodules, incomplete info about submodules in status-commands, manual maintenance of .gitmodules, a wide range of irritating/misleading failure modes and error messages...
It's really no surprise you hardly ever see a submodule on e.g. github, even on projects where it would make sense. The maintenance headache usually dwarves all potential benefits.
The mini-primer on submodule-WTFs: "must be executed in root-directory", no auto-clone/update of submodules, incomplete info about submodules in status-commands, manual maintenance of .gitmodules, a wide range of irritating/misleading failure modes and error messages...
It's really no surprise you hardly ever see a submodule on e.g. github, even on projects where it would make sense. The maintenance headache usually dwarves all potential benefits.
I've tried both and much prefer SourceTree.
It's a fantastic piece of software and find all the options intuitive and nicely executed.
It's a fantastic piece of software and find all the options intuitive and nicely executed.
I just wish they would merge in apenwarr's git-subtree. It's so much better than submodules for most use cases.
If I remember correctly, last time I tried gitbox, I couldn't use it for more than a few minutes because it showed commits as a linear history. I understand that they want to hide complexity, but that's exactly the complexity I need to see and understand. I need a tree-based view like gitx or the github network view to keep track of what's going on with my team. That along with line-by-line staging of commits are the killer features for me.
I still use the original version of gitx because it is simple as possible but still has these two features.
I still use the original version of gitx because it is simple as possible but still has these two features.
nice. would love to use gitbox but it lacks the most basic functionality of gitx. easy inline browsing of staged changes / diffs
you have to click on every file to open up a diff in order to preview changes before checkin
you have to click on every file to open up a diff in order to preview changes before checkin
I don't understand why everybody else is adding a lot of options and preferences even to the simplest functions like pull/push to their Git clients. In Gitbox you only configure URLs and then just interact with the same UI without jumping to extra windows all the time.