- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- technews@radiation.party
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- technews@radiation.party
You must log in or register to comment.
I wonder if something is ever going to overtake git as the mainstream source control. I honestly agree with everything, git is so verbose and makes it easy to break something. The commands also have bizarre names that makes doing something specific annoying. The git docs are also a giant wall of text, just yesterday someone posted this.. I really want to try something else but it feels like there’s no point because nobody would support or understand it.
Until then I guess I’ll keep doing
git status,git add *,git commit -m "some stuff",git pushuntil something breaks.It’s also an environment of weird verbosity. Try using libgit2 to do a clone, checkout, commit, push. It’s rediculous.
The cli abstracts it at least. But idk why the preference seems to be uber verbosity. We can have that verbosity and macros but nope.
What do you mean by verbosity? Are the commands long or is the command output long?
libgit2 is a library that folks use to implement git functionality inside of their applications. Writing the equivalent code via libgit2 to those standard git cli operations tend to be rather long and verbose compared to the one line cli commands.
Mercurial is worth trying, and you can use it as a client to Git too! Just be aware that Mercurial’s branching is not the same - but if you use Mercurial’s “bookmarks”, they’re actually compatible with Git branches.
These are beginner level complaints. 95% of interactions with git are simple and uneventful. And when they’re not, git offers a lot of flexibility. I’m curious if Fossil is as good as git at avoiding merge conflicts and rebasing. Most of the visualization problems are solved by a decent desktop client. And just try to find open issues on that Fossil project. That UI is absolute garbage. But hey, it’s going to save you 30 minutes on server installation, because you obviously have to do that every day. Oh and the Fossil community solution for automation? Mirror it to git
Most of the visualization problems are solved by a decent desktop client.
From article:
I am told that Git users commonly install third-party graphical viewers for Git, many of which do a better job of showing recent activity on the project. That is great, but these are still more third-party applications that must be installed and managed separately. Many are platform-specific. (One of the better ones, GitUp, only works on Mac, for example.) All require that you first sync your local repository then bring up their graphical interface on your desktop. And even with all that, I still cannot see what I typically want to see without multiple clicks. Checking on project status from a phone while away from the office is not an option.
Well the converse is also true. Desktop clients are way more powerful than that simple web UI. Maybe I’m not hardcore enough, but I’ve never had to check a commit successor in a graph view from a phone. And if you really do, you can install a different server. Gitea supports graph view. For simple checking on the project status github UI is more than serviceable
I understand you point of view, but honestly it will be good to have possibility to quickly check 'commit successor in a graph view from a phone.". I’m working with quite legacy systems (15-20yo) and sometimes, when I have some ideas about resolving some issues it will be good to quickly check backward and forward histories of commits around to verify something…
Thats not a dealbraker at all but it will be nice to have.
This is the first I’ve ever heard of Fossil, and it honestly seems really interesting! Having the executable be both the local CLI for working on the repo and the server for providing the whole GitHub-esque suite of services in a trivially self-hostable fashion is kind of galaxy brain.
