19 ms·

GitHub Desktop is now available

293 points by bpierre 11y ago

harel 11y ago
Its a shame that a Linux version is not included. A significant volume of developers work on Linux. If doing a multi platform application, why exclude it?
- Bulk70 11y ago
  As strange as it sounds the lack of a decent git GUI is one of the reasons I don't feel comfortable using Linux as my main development environment (not the only reason of course). It's a big pitty neither Github nor Atlassian (the big "git" players, in my mind) seem inclined to release a GUI client for Linux.
  - cryon 11y ago
    I feel like most GNU/Linux users (especially developers) are comfortable enough using cli tool for this to be a non issue.
    - AndrewDucker 11y ago
      Of course they are. The people who aren't comfortable enough using a CLI stay clear of Linux.
      - MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
        I think that's a poor excuse for not having a linux version. By that logic, we wouldn't have sublime because vim/emacs should be enough. As I see it, the main reason I like to use linux on my development boxes is flexibility(or call it freedom if you want, I don't like doing so). I can do things in whatever way works best for me and I can create scripts/install packages to glue stuff together fairly easily to adapt to my workflow.
        AndrewDucker 11y ago
        That was rather my point. It's not that Linux doesn't need UIs because their users all use CLIs, it's that it's users all user CLIs because anyone who'd like a nice UI stays well away.
        cryon 11y ago
        I never said anything about removing existing software (such as sublime). I was talking about there being less incentive to create a git gui for a user base that is - from my experience - happy with the current cli interface or any other already existing client (such as magit for emacs).
  - mrsuprawsm 11y ago
    I think learning the fundamentals of the git command line is pretty simple, and pays large dividends. Indeed, learning to use git was one of the main things that spurred me to learn to use the command line for many other tasks. It's a good starting point.
    - Bulk70 11y ago
      I'm very comfortable with the command line in general already, and if I have to I can use git on the command line. I've just always felt a GUI is the best interface for git - personal preference I suppose. I'm a very visual person when it comes to code, and being able to see a nice history/diff etc inline with a few clicks just sits better with how I view the world & my ideal workflow. I appreciate I'm probably in the minority on that though, as evidenced by the lack of client from those two big players I assume they feel that way too!
      - MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
        Exactly, I feel the same. By default, git commit just shows me "M /src/foo/whatever", I prefer to use a GUI where I can then click on that and it shows me a nice fullscreen visual diff with colour highlighting etc. Just works a lot better for me in being productive and reviewing things before I commit(an essential part of any workflow)
        thruflo 11y ago
        Try `git add -p`
        hueving 11y ago
        or `git diff`
      - shampine 11y ago
        I also prefer a nice visual diff and branching so usually depending on what project I am working in I always have Gitlab or Github open in my browser. Everything else is done on the CLI.
  - nanny 11y ago
    Try the Magit package for Emacs [1]. You don't have to know (much) Emacs to use it, and it's a really great client. [1]: https://github.com/magit/magit https://github.com/magit/magit
    - agumonkey 11y ago
      git cherry picking was nice, under magit it's even better.
    - zachlatta 11y ago
      Magit is AWESOME. It's easily saved me an hour each day (when using git heavily).
      - agumonkey 11y ago
        Which parts do you enjoy the most ?
        subsection1h 11y ago
        What I like most about Magit is staging, unstaging, and reverting hunks.
        zachlatta 11y ago
        It's super easy to create a new branch and push it upstream (especially when creating PRs). I know I could write a script to do that for me, but there's something so nice about having little things like that already baked in.
  - art0rz 11y ago
    I haven't found a dedicated Linux GUI client for git either, but I'm a big fan of IntelliJ's CVS support. While it supports far from everything you can do with git, its interface is excellent, and having it integrated with your editor is a big plus.
    - UserRights 11y ago
      smartgit is very nice, but there are many mnore GUI clients on linux you can find very easily.
  - davexunit 11y ago
    Magit is the best Git UI in existence.
  - MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
    I use http://rabbitvcs.org/ http://rabbitvcs.org/ (it's a nautilus plugin, so basically it's got the TortoiseSVN style context menu interface), and find it great. Having said that, my main work is with SVN, only use git for interacting with open source projects I need to submit PRs to etc.
  - h078 11y ago
    Git cola is very good on linux http://git-cola.github.io/ http://git-cola.github.io/
    - davvid 11y ago
      git-cola runs on Mac OS X and Windows too. It's also very vim-ish / keyboard-centric, which is a big plus if you hate using a mouse, but still like to visually stage things. https://github.com/git-cola/git-cola https://github.com/git-cola/git-cola
  - macco 11y ago
    There are several GUIs for git on Linux. GitG comes to mind. But there are several others - also with github integration. https://git-scm.com/download/gui/linux https://git-scm.com/download/gui/linux
  - tom9729 11y ago
    Gitg (https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gitg/ https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gitg/) looks decent, although it's Linux-only. It's like git-gui and gitk merged into a GTK3 interface. It would be cool if Atlassian would open-source their client (SourceTree). They make money off of Bitbucket/Stash and provide SourceTree as freeware, so it seems like a no-brainer to open-source it and let the community port it to Linux.
  - rimantas 11y ago
    How about SmartGit? Back in the days when I was working on Windows and Linux I used SmartSVN, quite nice for a Java app.
- JeremyMorgan 11y ago
  It's likely they felt it's not worth the time since most Linux users are using the CLI for everything else, and likely wouldn't be interested in a GUI. Personally I've never used the Github GUI and have no plans to, running the commands is fast and easy.
  - zxcvcxz 11y ago
    I think it's a myth that Linux users aren't interested in GUI tools. According to stack overflow statistics, Ubuntu is the most popular Linux based OS amongst developers, which is an OS that is much more GUI based than say Arch linux. According to the same stats, Linux and OS X usage is statistically tied at ~21%. If you take into account the fact that only about 2% of computer users run Linux at all it's pretty clear that programmers disproportionately prefer Linux (and to a lesser extent OS X) to other systems. I personally have already moved away from github, but I still wish they would build some tools that work on Linux.
    - etwigg 11y ago
      Shameless plug: I recently built a new linux GUI git client. The people who use it really like it. Still working on docs to better explain what makes it different. Like GitHub's client, it's more than just a wrapper around the CLI, but unlike GitHub's client it exposes git's full power (tags, cherry-pick, rebase, etc.) If you'd like to try a new linux gui client, give it a spin! Video in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4UQpGk1Ry8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4UQpGk1Ry8 Free download Win/Mac/Linux: https://secure.diffplug.com/versions/1.6.1 https://secure.diffplug.com/versions/1.6.1
      - Nux 11y ago
        You should publish some screenshots of it.
        etwigg 11y ago
        100% agree! Was hoping to have the full manual done today, but it's not ready yet. Kinda worked out - I'll spend today ducking as the GitHub goliath whooshes over me for HN readership's attention ;-). The rest of the product's docs are complete and full of screenshots: https://docs.diffplug.com/1.6.1/ViewerDiffers/TextViewerDiffer/ https://docs.diffplug.com/1.6.1/ViewerDiffers/TextViewerDiff... so the git client will be too. This client animates changes to the DAG, so I'm experimenting with animated gifs so that the manual can capture the feel of using it.
- StavrosK 11y ago
  My thoughts exactly. How different from OS X can it be?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - StavrosK 11y ago
      Huh? My question is "how hard is porting this to Linux, if there's already an OS X version?".
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - blkhp19 11y ago
        OS X and Linux are not the same OS. The entire stack for writing GUI applications is completely different - as different as writing an iOS app vs. an Android app. OS X and Linux don't share the same kernel, the same foundation frameworks, or the same UI frameworks. The entire application would have to be written from scratch. If they're really ambitious they could probably share some Objective-C business logic, but anything that touches the UI is platform specific.
        StavrosK 11y ago
        They have a Windows version. Linux isn't less like OS X than Windows is.
        blkhp19 11y ago
        Just because you can type "sudo" on both doesn't make them similar when it comes to making GUI applications. Again, the frameworks are completely different, meaning that a complete or nearly complete rewrite would be necessary.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  It's possible that since Linux is a smaller percentage of their user base that they prioritized the Mac OS X and Windows ports and will eventually do Linux. If I were them that's what I would do at least.
- techwizrd 11y ago
  I'm actually working on a Github Desktop "clone" using Electron (so that it'll be "cross-platform"). I'm also working a Gtk+3 version (since I have more experience with that), but I haven't gotten too far.
  - westoque 11y ago
    Same here. Although I've already gotten somewhere. Already implemented the "History" tab. Ping me if you want to see it. Planning to open source it soon.
- igravious 11y ago
  Agreed. It's 2015. No excuse not to put out a Linux version. I thought those days are over. The fact that _Microsoft_ of all companies is releasing multiple developer tools on Linux these days should tell you all you need to know about this bone of contention. I'd have expected more from Github, to be honest, given Atom. On my Ubuntu at the moment the big cross-platform packages I have are: .Net platform, Visual Studio Code, Spotify client, Skype client, Viber client, Chrome, Scrivener, …
- technomancy 11y ago
  My guess is they don't bother with Linux systems because proper application packaging on Linux OSes is source-centric. They've made the choice not to offer their code as free software, so that would mean it would be a headache to support on systems that value software freedom.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Maybe because most GNU/Linux developers seem to be happy using it as a PDP-11 with a VT100? Having used a multiple of desktop systems since the mid-80's, and lots of their main IDE systems, I could never grasp this attitude. And yes, I do my way around Emacs and Elisp (but it comes from MIT Lisp culture).
jvehent 11y ago
While I find this initiative fantastic, it's a bit frustrating that Github, a company that lives on source code being open, does not publish the code of tools like this one.
- mrsuprawsm 11y ago
  Exactly, it's somewhat ironic.
  - mbrock 11y ago
    You could also say that it's ironic that people who are concerned with openness of source code would choose to host it on a proprietary platform. But hey, it's super convenient. (I do it too, but let's not kid ourselves.)
- eli 11y ago
  I don't mean this as a knock on Github, but I'd argue they are a company that lives on selling corporate licenses and enterprise software to companies that don't want everything to be public.
  - totalrobe 11y ago
    Correct. They earn money off of private repositories... not sure how them hosting public projects adds directly to the bottom line besides the obvious marketing benefit and sticky factors.
    - stephendicato 11y ago
      not sure how them hosting public projects adds directly to the bottom line They get a ton of feedback and insight from non-paying users. The usage and feedback can drive both the product and business roadmap for their enterprise offerings. Every developer who enjoys using it for personal or open source is also likely to recommend it to their employer as well. I know I have helped drive adoption in a few organizations.
    - 11y ago
porker 11y ago
Is there a way to clone BitBucket repositories from inside Github Desktop? It looks like they've locked it down to clone from Github only.
- Fiskie 11y ago
  There doesn't seem to be a way to do so, but if you open a repository cloned elsewhere everything works just fine. It even prompts for your Bitbucket password if you try to push.
- patrickread 11y ago
  Yea, I was using Github for Mac previously, and all of my non-Github projects ported over to the Github Desktop app. Like the other reply said, you just have to manually clone and the 'Add' it.
- toxican 11y ago
  You have to manually clone bitbucket stuff in. It supports that properly, with logins and all that. But you can't do it via the UI.
cenaymer 11y ago
I've heard numerous times that Linux's lackluster popularity is due 'chicken and egg' problem in the application space. If a company that gets the maximum possible percentage of Linux users is not willing to support the application for Linux then we can't expect anyone else will even attempt. May be because Linux users are 'smarter' and better off with CLI ;)
xirdstl 11y ago
I use Atlassian Sourcetree as a git GUI on Windows. Does GitHub Desktop do anything different / better?
- Fiskie 11y ago
  The client itself is very streamlined. Push/Pull operations are swept into a single Sync operation. Merging is as easy as selecting a branch from a dropdown and clicking a button. Things like that. On the downside, utilities like tagging, blame and stash do not seem to exist. The account linking system from the old GitHub client hasn't changed and you can't clone from anywhere that isn't GitHub. Revision history is a bit ~too~ simplified and you can't really see at a glance what branches are deriving from where, and you can only see the history of one branch at a time. I'm sure newbie developers on Github might appreciate the simplified UX/UI, but it's missing a ton of features that are useful in an environment with multiple devs.
  - bronson 11y ago
    > Push/Pull operations are swept into a single Sync operation. This feature drove me nuts with their old client. One day they're going to realize that it throws away a very useful Git feature. A few years ago we tried setting up marketing's content creators on the Mac GitHub client. After that, far too many conversations went like this: "Try pulling the new changes." "Um... pull?" "Right, sorry, forgot. Hit sync to pull down the new changes." "But won't that push my mods?" "I suppose... I don't know." "I don't want to push my stuff yet." "OK, dammit. Open a terminal..."
  - SZJX 11y ago
    It makes so little sense to make push/pull into one thing. It's likely to do much more harm than good.
leeoniya 11y ago
i wish they would make a decent mobile web interface, the current one is just painful to use. i always have to switch to desktop mode.
- farresito 11y ago
  Yes, the mobile web interface is quite bad. I mean, it's not horrible; it does the most basic things, but it requires more than one click to see very important things, like commit messages.
mwcampbell 11y ago
The Windows app is still WPF-based and still uses ClickOnce for its installer. The web page claims that this is a new unified app, replacing GitHub for Mac and GitHub for Windows. But it seems to me that there are still two separate apps. I had expected something like a desktop app using web technologies via Electron, like Atom.
- pyre 11y ago
  Just because the UI layer and installer are using OS-specific libraries doesn't mean it isn't a unified app under the hood.
  - mwcampbell 11y ago
    You're right, of course. My comment was premature. But I've looked at both the Windows and Mac apps now, and as far as I can tell, there's no common core besides (probably) libgit2. Each app is implemented using a language runtime and frameworks specific to its host platform. So any unification is only skin-deep. Maybe I'm just envious of companies that have the resources and discipline to keep up the appearance of a unified app while in fact maintaining multiple independent implementations. FWIW, if I were going to implement a unified multi-platform app, I'd use SWT; in fact, I did on a recent project.
- kitsunesoba 11y ago
  Please no. GitHub for Mac is an extremely solid, smooth, light little native app and I would hate to see it vanish in favor of a heavy chromium-based monstrosity. I don't use Windows but if I did I'd prefer a WPF or .NET app over a chrome wrapper there, too. Common core+separate native UIs will always be the best sort of cross platform app in my eyes.
  - mwcampbell 11y ago
    I'm sure you're right about a native Cocoa app feeling nicer than a Chromium-based one. But on Windows, WPF is notorious for poor performance; a Chromium-based app might actually be better on that platform.
AdmiralAsshat 11y ago
Can't access my Windows desktop to look now, but I thought I've had Github Desktop running on my PC for awhile now. Was this previously in beta?
nwienert 11y ago
I've always wanted something where I can see the status of all my projects at once: - Have other people committed things to origin on any of my repos? - Do I have uncommitted changes on any of my repos? - Notifications for when people push Basically this but focusing more on collaboration.
- shurcooL 11y ago
  > - Do I have uncommitted changes on any of my repos? I wanted to know that too, so I made https://github.com/shurcooL/gostatus https://github.com/shurcooL/gostatus for my Go repos.
cshimmin 11y ago
Can I do anything with this that I can't already do from the website, or is it just the same tools with a nicer native UI? In other words, is this somehow bridging the gap between the site and the git CLI (which could be useful for some of my less tech-savvy collaborators)?
toxican 11y ago
Hasn't this been available for a while now? I know I'd been using it for at least a few months up until recently. I made the switch to Sourcetree the other day and haven't looked back. I never realize how infuriating not being able to see changes in a repo at a glance without clicking into it was until I suddenly could. Can't speak to any more advanced differences though. I'm still very, very new to git.
insulanian 11y ago
I tried GitHub for Windows but found it a bit dumbed down. Switched over to Atlasian's Source Tree and never looked back.
- hittaruki 11y ago
  Can't help it. I have to mention http://magit.vc/ http://magit.vc/.
- dcre 11y ago
  I use SourceTree full-time but am keeping an eye on GitUp[1]. The UI is not quite there yet IMO, but it's insanely fast and I love the focus on keyboard shortcuts. [1] http://gitup.co/ http://gitup.co/
  - benbristow 11y ago
    Looks amazing. Shame it's only Mac OSX.
  - MichaelGG 11y ago
    What in particular do these provide over just using Git Extensions?
- donatj 11y ago
  Source Tree was irritatingly dumbed down. No built in force push because "it could be dangerous". Switched to Tower and never looked back.
  - stinos 11y ago
    You can however add most 'non-dumb' features you need as custom actions so it's only two clicks away. Now they just have to add customizable keyboard shortcuts and I'd be all raving about it, but still I use it everyday mainly for the staging area.
- cname 11y ago
  SourceTree is really nice overall. To name a few things, I prefer its view of history, its hunk selection UI, and its commit message box (GitHub's is tiny and can't be made much bigger). It's also nice that it supports Mercurial. I had some problems with it keeping changes synced with the file system, though (on Mac OS). E.g., I'd change something in my editor and SourceTree wouldn't pick it up until I reopened the repository in SourceTree. I also prefer a single window like GitHub's app, but that is a minor annoyance. The non-syncing made SourceTree unusable after a while, and I went back to GitHub for Mac. I wish Atlassian would put out an update, because I'd prefer to switch back.
grandalf 11y ago
Github probably considers the "depth" of git use by the average user to be one of its KPIs. Git is extremely powerful, if you are only doing checkouts and commits you are under-utilizing the tool and also underutilizing the service. So it's smart for Github to build tools that lower the bar for a) understanding git, and b) using git's more powerful features. Useful metrics would be things like the percentage of users who use the pull request flow, use it with at least one comment per pull request, have pull requests that get revised, etc. etc. I'd guess that part of the growth potential driving Github's valuation is the notion that git's power features add significant productivity/value and that github is uniquely positioned to let a significantly large number of developers and teams make optimal use of those features for development and collaboration.
- arrmn 11y ago
  I'm a beginner here so sorry for if it's a stupid question. I work with GitFlow and the only things I use are commits and checkouts, but for what do you use Git? About which powerful features are you talking about, does anyone have a link with some more in depth informations?
  - on_and_off 11y ago
    there are many 'minor' features that are occasionally useful. For example, when you make a stupid mistake, reflog can make you gain a couple of minutes.
  - camenk 11y ago
    I think we use a lot of PR flow in our team. It's really powerful if you collaborate or plan to collaborate with others as it allows you to get together and look at the commits to ensure code quality (in theory). Even the command line git itself is really nice because it gives you the current condition of your repo and suggestion on what you can do next. You have changes, if you want to commit use this command or if you want to add use this command.
  - coldpie 11y ago
    Some features I use: Cherry-picking commits across branches. Merging branches. Rebases for forward-porting your work onto a new upstream. Bisects for determining which commit introduced a bug. Push/pull for sharing. Format-patch for sending patches around. Submodules.
bamazizi 11y ago
What's the advantage to SourceTree? aside from nicer ui. I wish it had the code review, commenting, issue tracking of the web app in a desktop application, all in one place. It's a pain to move constantly between the editor, CLI/SourceTree and Github web app for everyday tasks.
- marpstar 11y ago
  I don't even think that this new client supports anything but GitHub. Their previous Windows client didn't.
  - qcz 11y ago
    Yes, it did, but it had very basic functionality. The new client still supports non-GitHub repositories (tried with private GitLab repos).
  - softawre 11y ago
    I'm using this new client against Bitbucket right now. Just added local repos that I had already cloned, and it's just following the .git/config like any good git client does.
XzetaU8 11y ago
"Why don't you support the Linux platform? At this time, we're focused on optimizing the Mac and Windows experience. We're always thinking about potential improvements for the diverse needs of our users, though!" https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/why-don-t-you-support-the-linux-platform/ https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/why-don-t-you-s... Something tells me that the Linux version will come up later.
- matthewbauer 11y ago
  Most Linux users are going to be inclined to use the command line. Even with these new additions GitHub Desktop's features are much smaller than what is possible with the command line.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- thawkins 11y ago
  Once the universe has cooled to absolute zero, that is a corporate non answer. "Go away" dressed up in a party frock.
koyote 11y ago
So does anyone know what they used to build the 'unified' app UI? If I remember rightly they used WPF on Windows in earlier versions. Is the UI now abstracted using a third-party framework/inhouse framework?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- 0xffffabcd 11y ago
  They're still using WPF on Windows.
- amadeusw 11y ago
  The UI looks doable with WPF. I would love to see the code and learn from it
- xd1936 11y ago
  If it's using WPF, does that mean that it requires .NET?
  - skeletonjelly 11y ago
    Yep. Though AFAIK .NET is included with Windows these days
- justboxing 11y ago
  If they switch to the open source & cross platform .Net Core, then the 'Unified' app UI is possible. http://dotnet.github.io/core/ http://dotnet.github.io/core/
BoppreH 11y ago
Is this related to the recent Github For Windows redesign? It used to be a great product, but the last version made some really odd UI changes and the whole thing became 10x slower. Github For Windows used to be as important to my workflow as my code editor. I absolutely loved the "click to select which lines to commit" feature, and I'm pretty sure it improved the quality of my commits drastically. And it was constantly improving. A few weeks ago came a new version that changed everything. Previous updates used to be incremental, but this one seemed to replace everything at once. Overall the UI was still good, even though important parts became hidden behind tabs. But the performance... Oh god the performance. Syncing repos became a multi-minute operation. Listing commits went from instantaneous to taking several seconds. It became so unusable I switched back to Linux for development.
bluetidepro 11y ago
When I saw "Desktop" in the name, I was really hoping this also brought some of the web features to the app. Things such as being able to view/edit the wiki, or issues of the repo. I wonder if that is in their long term plans for the app at all? That would be really awesome.
- dkuntz2 11y ago
  The wiki is just a git repository of markdown files. You can grab that and use a local text editor if you want, though that's not integration with the app (but I'm also partial to using the command line).
- prayerslayer 11y ago
  So much this. Github for Mac is quite good already for commiting and pull-requesting. I could stop using my browser (for Github, at least) if they put issue management (open, close, view, comments) in there too. Would be awesome and a more unified experience.
rjv 11y ago
I'd love to see more development in the Git GUI space; a GUI really enabled git adoption and comprehension on my team. SourceTree has been my go-to for over a year now and it generally gets the job done, but it can be flakey at times (on Windows) and it seems like Atlassian has taken a hiatus from active development. I hope Atlassian takes up the reins again - this tool is pretty essential for me and I'd be happy to pay for it.
- Akkuma 11y ago
  Check SmartGit out. I've used it for years and love it.
- slantyyz 11y ago
  >> SourceTree has been my go-to for over a year now and it generally gets the job done, but it can be flakey at times (on Windows) I've had the same experience. SourceTree has gotten better since I've started using it, but I frequently get hangs on commits and pushes on one of my machines. So much to the point that I downgraded to an older version of SourceTree. One of the only things I miss after switching from OSX to Windows last year is Gitbox - http://www.gitboxapp.com/ http://www.gitboxapp.com/ - it's not free, but for what I do, it really did the trick. This new desktop version of Github looks a lot better than its predecessor, but I need to play with it more. It does feel a lot more like Gitbox to me than SourceTree.
- kannonboy 11y ago
  I'm Tim, a dev at Atlassian. I just thought I'd chime in to let you know we are absolutely taking up the reins on SourceTree again! In fact, we're in the process of growing out our team. You can read a little more about it on the ST blog from earlier this year: http://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2015/02/25/were-just-getting-started-with-sourcetree http://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2015/02/25/were-just-getting-s.... We are aware of the performance issues affecting Windows users with certain repository shapes and have our backlog prioritized accordingly. I haven't had much of a chance to play with GitHub Desktop yet, but it can only be a good thing for the users of all Git clients - nothing like a bit of healthy competition :) However, SourceTree's focus will remain on providing the best possible experience for professional teams using Git (and Mercurial).
the_ancient 11y ago
For Mac or Windows.... it is just insulting that GitHub continues to Treat linux has a second class citizen when with out Linux Git would not be a project...
- comboy 11y ago
  In their defense, I don't see many linux users choosing GUI app over command line to handle git (unless they have it integrated in their IDE)
  - r3bl 11y ago
    Well, to be honest, as a Linux user, I would definitely consider using GitHub's own GUI application instead of some application developed by a third party.
  - yellowapple 11y ago
    As a Linux user: I very much would at least try it. Magit works great for the git repos themselves, but when I'm on my work machine (a Macbook) I tend to use Github's Mac client in order to handle things Github-specific (particularly cloning and handling pull requests).
  - mhw 11y ago
    I use git primarily on Linux, but I don't use an IDE. I frequently use 'git gui' to prepare commits - I particularly like the ability to select individual lines from a diff to include in a commit, breaking apart multiple changes to the same file when necessary. I also use gitk a lot. I'm very comfortable using the command line, but it's not correct to assume that command line users wouldn't want a GUI tool as well.
- hueving 11y ago
  They don't participate in the open source community. They're similar to Apple in that they take open source stuff and build a closed ecosystem on top of it.
  - 11y ago
lewisl9029 11y ago
I've been using the beta for a while and have found it to be quite nice. Simple operations are quick and intuitive. If you need anything more advanced, a git shell for the current project is just 2 clicks away. Having all the visual diffs readily available in the client before committing is quite convenient, as is being able to push your branch and open a pull request for it at the press of a button. I'm hoping issues and PR management is next on the plate. You can open PRs from the client right now, but to review and merge them you'd still need to open a browser.
tychuz 11y ago
It has been out for a while (I guess in beta form), atleast for Windows. Still using GitExtensions. This has a nice interface for hobby projects, but when working with "enterprise" huge projects at work - it lags noticeably.
rcarmo 11y ago
There's an UX/affordance issue with merges. Took me a while to figure out how do do them via the UI, it's not immediately obvious that the side pane (which tries to take you to the web site for submitting pull requests) has nothing to do with local merges, which are now accomplished via an option that only appears when you're comparing branches (on the new timeline/graph thingy).
krisgenre 11y ago
Hmm.. are there really no good cross platform GUI toolkits? Why is Linux being ignored often even by companies that target developers?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- jimktrains2 11y ago
  Maybe if you're deving on linux you just want the CLI anyway? I don't know if I'm abnormal or not, but I've _never_ wanted a git gui and really don't see the need for it at all.
  - krisgenre 11y ago
    Ya, CLI is great but for people like me who mix both ( like using gitg for committing ), GUIs could be handy. There are lot of Java (or Android) developers who don't want to switch to Linux precisely for this reason.
    - TsiCClawOfLight 11y ago
      But those Java and android developers will use android studio, IntelliJ or eclipse, which all have good guis. I don't see how that is an issue in this case.
- kitsunesoba 11y ago
  I'd say that part of the problem is that there is no "right" way to develop for Linux. There's a multitude of choices available at every turn when developing software for Linux, and while this is its strength, it's also its weakness. On Windows and especially OS X there are established "right ways" that can easily be deferred to. Trying to provide support for Linux software could also potentially be nightmarish given the innumerable factors at play. There's no end to the number of ways any given Linux box may be set up.
  - 11y ago
nedludd 11y ago
What's the difference between this and the former "Github" app?
paublyrne 11y ago
I've been using Github on Mac for a while now. It won't do all the fancy things that the CLI will, but I love it for the ability to break up large bunches of files into separate commits, for when I forget to commit for a while or my local repo gets a little messy.
- TsiCClawOfLight 11y ago
  Isn't this something you could do easily via an IDE or, say, magit?
- unfunco 11y ago
  git add -p
yeldarb 11y ago
The new tutorial is pretty spiffy. It teaches you the branch-commit-pull request workflow by actually taking you through the process on a mock repo!
msluyter 11y ago
Just downloaded it and tried it out. Looks pretty nice, but the history view isn't populating when I try to use it for github enterprise projects (I did login successfully). I'm just seeing a completely black rectangle and no commits. One theory I have is that our default upstream branch isn't master, but I'm not sure where to set that in the app. Anyone else noticed this?
justboxing 11y ago
In Options -> Privacy, why is the 'Help us improve by sending anonymous usage data' checked by default? Shouldn't it be opt-in and not opt-out?
jchomali 11y ago
This is awesome!
untilHellbanned 11y ago
What to do with the scary message? Does this affect the OS version of git or just the version that this Github application uses? OS X 10.9 and later includes Git, so GitHub Desktop will no longer install Git as part of its command line tools. The version of Git you have installed through GitHub Desktop is no longer supported. It's recommended that you uninstall it as soon as possible.
kstenerud 11y ago
Oh wonderful. Installed it, and now none of the git repos I pointed it to are recognized by git command line anymore :/
gcb0 11y ago
those wankers should work on getting diffs to actually show on their site. hate when i have to code review some contributor and the site just says "oh, i will not bother showing any change on that file"... so i have to download their branch, run diff on the awesome `meld`, which kicks their visualization anyway, but then the only good thing about github: inline comments on code reviews... goes away. i have to either email or add lose comments on the code review panel with what i think. but hey, now we can have the same crappy experience on (selected) desktops! hooray! well, at least you managed to get me to write an offense on a public forum. that is something. you wankers.
jaytaylor 11y ago
This is confusing to me. Why is it "GitHub Desktop is now available" rather "GitHub Desktop App Updated"? What is actually new here? I know the native GitHub GUI app has been available for a number of years before now.
boardwaalk 11y ago
Well, that update turned the app into flickering, unresponsive mess on my Mac (10.11). And I have to use some sort of old school contact form to report a bug to GitHub? I'm a bit incredulous. I like GitHub for the basic "see what you're committing and commit it" work flow, using the command line otherwise, but I suppose I'll switch to Sourcetree for now.
gideon_b 11y ago
I was really hoping this would be a native app for the collaborative/social aspects of github.
lucisferre 11y ago
My initial impression is that I like it, but I'm confused what "git sync" is. I've never done a "sync" before so I'm uncertain what will happen when I click the button. Seriously, I get it, people don't love git's choice of verbs and syntax. Picking different ones arbitrarily helps no one however.
andyfleming 11y ago
I really like the GitHub desktop app. Although, I honestly I could care less about the fancy new graph feature. I would rather they had added a couple of simpler, more useful features: • the ability to organize repos by organization or with custom folders/lists • the option to open a repo in a new window by right-clicking on one from the list in the left column
shurcooL 11y ago
The new layout looks great! But there's an immediately obvious bug, the middle pane keeps resizing to become wider every time you switch between repos. Also, one large repo I had simply shows 0 commits. It worked just fine before. And another even larger repo works fine.
- shurcooL 11y ago
  An update, I tried to remove the problematic git repo and re-added it, and now history shows up okay.
jschulenklopper 11y ago
I wonder why, after downloading and installing the GitHub Desktop application I should use my GitHub account and password to connect the client to GitHub (with no other way available)? Would it not have been better if GitHub Desktop was a seperate application that gets permissions (for example via OAuth 2.0) as an application in the "Authorized applications" section of the GitHub profile? Or am I missing something here?

293 points by bpierre 11y ago

harel 11y ago

Its a shame that a Linux version is not included. A significant volume of developers work on Linux. If doing a multi platform application, why exclude it?

Bulk70 11y ago
As strange as it sounds the lack of a decent git GUI is one of the reasons I don't feel comfortable using Linux as my main development environment (not the only reason of course). It's a big pitty neither Github nor Atlassian (the big "git" players, in my mind) seem inclined to release a GUI client for Linux.
- cryon 11y ago
  I feel like most GNU/Linux users (especially developers) are comfortable enough using cli tool for this to be a non issue.
  - AndrewDucker 11y ago
    Of course they are. The people who aren't comfortable enough using a CLI stay clear of Linux.
    - MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
      I think that's a poor excuse for not having a linux version. By that logic, we wouldn't have sublime because vim/emacs should be enough. As I see it, the main reason I like to use linux on my development boxes is flexibility(or call it freedom if you want, I don't like doing so). I can do things in whatever way works best for me and I can create scripts/install packages to glue stuff together fairly easily to adapt to my workflow.
      - AndrewDucker 11y ago
        That was rather my point. It's not that Linux doesn't need UIs because their users all use CLIs, it's that it's users all user CLIs because anyone who'd like a nice UI stays well away.
      - cryon 11y ago
        I never said anything about removing existing software (such as sublime). I was talking about there being less incentive to create a git gui for a user base that is - from my experience - happy with the current cli interface or any other already existing client (such as magit for emacs).
- mrsuprawsm 11y ago
  I think learning the fundamentals of the git command line is pretty simple, and pays large dividends. Indeed, learning to use git was one of the main things that spurred me to learn to use the command line for many other tasks. It's a good starting point.
  - Bulk70 11y ago
    I'm very comfortable with the command line in general already, and if I have to I can use git on the command line. I've just always felt a GUI is the best interface for git - personal preference I suppose. I'm a very visual person when it comes to code, and being able to see a nice history/diff etc inline with a few clicks just sits better with how I view the world & my ideal workflow. I appreciate I'm probably in the minority on that though, as evidenced by the lack of client from those two big players I assume they feel that way too!
    - MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
      Exactly, I feel the same. By default, git commit just shows me "M /src/foo/whatever", I prefer to use a GUI where I can then click on that and it shows me a nice fullscreen visual diff with colour highlighting etc. Just works a lot better for me in being productive and reviewing things before I commit(an essential part of any workflow)
      - thruflo 11y ago
        Try `git add -p`
        hueving 11y ago
        or `git diff`
    - shampine 11y ago
      I also prefer a nice visual diff and branching so usually depending on what project I am working in I always have Gitlab or Github open in my browser. Everything else is done on the CLI.
- nanny 11y ago
  Try the Magit package for Emacs [1]. You don't have to know (much) Emacs to use it, and it's a really great client. [1]: https://github.com/magit/magit https://github.com/magit/magit
  - agumonkey 11y ago
    git cherry picking was nice, under magit it's even better.
  - zachlatta 11y ago
    Magit is AWESOME. It's easily saved me an hour each day (when using git heavily).
    - agumonkey 11y ago
      Which parts do you enjoy the most ?
      - subsection1h 11y ago
        What I like most about Magit is staging, unstaging, and reverting hunks.
      - zachlatta 11y ago
        It's super easy to create a new branch and push it upstream (especially when creating PRs). I know I could write a script to do that for me, but there's something so nice about having little things like that already baked in.
- art0rz 11y ago
  I haven't found a dedicated Linux GUI client for git either, but I'm a big fan of IntelliJ's CVS support. While it supports far from everything you can do with git, its interface is excellent, and having it integrated with your editor is a big plus.
  - UserRights 11y ago
    smartgit is very nice, but there are many mnore GUI clients on linux you can find very easily.
- davexunit 11y ago
  Magit is the best Git UI in existence.
- MNOLJNDRDY 11y ago
  I use http://rabbitvcs.org/ http://rabbitvcs.org/ (it's a nautilus plugin, so basically it's got the TortoiseSVN style context menu interface), and find it great. Having said that, my main work is with SVN, only use git for interacting with open source projects I need to submit PRs to etc.
- h078 11y ago
  Git cola is very good on linux http://git-cola.github.io/ http://git-cola.github.io/
  - davvid 11y ago
    git-cola runs on Mac OS X and Windows too. It's also very vim-ish / keyboard-centric, which is a big plus if you hate using a mouse, but still like to visually stage things. https://github.com/git-cola/git-cola https://github.com/git-cola/git-cola
- macco 11y ago
  There are several GUIs for git on Linux. GitG comes to mind. But there are several others - also with github integration. https://git-scm.com/download/gui/linux https://git-scm.com/download/gui/linux
- tom9729 11y ago
  Gitg (https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gitg/ https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gitg/) looks decent, although it's Linux-only. It's like git-gui and gitk merged into a GTK3 interface. It would be cool if Atlassian would open-source their client (SourceTree). They make money off of Bitbucket/Stash and provide SourceTree as freeware, so it seems like a no-brainer to open-source it and let the community port it to Linux.
- rimantas 11y ago
  How about SmartGit? Back in the days when I was working on Windows and Linux I used SmartSVN, quite nice for a Java app.
JeremyMorgan 11y ago
It's likely they felt it's not worth the time since most Linux users are using the CLI for everything else, and likely wouldn't be interested in a GUI. Personally I've never used the Github GUI and have no plans to, running the commands is fast and easy.
- zxcvcxz 11y ago
  I think it's a myth that Linux users aren't interested in GUI tools. According to stack overflow statistics, Ubuntu is the most popular Linux based OS amongst developers, which is an OS that is much more GUI based than say Arch linux. According to the same stats, Linux and OS X usage is statistically tied at ~21%. If you take into account the fact that only about 2% of computer users run Linux at all it's pretty clear that programmers disproportionately prefer Linux (and to a lesser extent OS X) to other systems. I personally have already moved away from github, but I still wish they would build some tools that work on Linux.
  - etwigg 11y ago
    Shameless plug: I recently built a new linux GUI git client. The people who use it really like it. Still working on docs to better explain what makes it different. Like GitHub's client, it's more than just a wrapper around the CLI, but unlike GitHub's client it exposes git's full power (tags, cherry-pick, rebase, etc.) If you'd like to try a new linux gui client, give it a spin! Video in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4UQpGk1Ry8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4UQpGk1Ry8 Free download Win/Mac/Linux: https://secure.diffplug.com/versions/1.6.1 https://secure.diffplug.com/versions/1.6.1
    - Nux 11y ago
      You should publish some screenshots of it.
      - etwigg 11y ago
        100% agree! Was hoping to have the full manual done today, but it's not ready yet. Kinda worked out - I'll spend today ducking as the GitHub goliath whooshes over me for HN readership's attention ;-). The rest of the product's docs are complete and full of screenshots: https://docs.diffplug.com/1.6.1/ViewerDiffers/TextViewerDiffer/ https://docs.diffplug.com/1.6.1/ViewerDiffers/TextViewerDiff... so the git client will be too. This client animates changes to the DAG, so I'm experimenting with animated gifs so that the manual can capture the feel of using it.
StavrosK 11y ago
My thoughts exactly. How different from OS X can it be?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - StavrosK 11y ago
    Huh? My question is "how hard is porting this to Linux, if there's already an OS X version?".
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - blkhp19 11y ago
      OS X and Linux are not the same OS. The entire stack for writing GUI applications is completely different - as different as writing an iOS app vs. an Android app. OS X and Linux don't share the same kernel, the same foundation frameworks, or the same UI frameworks. The entire application would have to be written from scratch. If they're really ambitious they could probably share some Objective-C business logic, but anything that touches the UI is platform specific.
      - StavrosK 11y ago
        They have a Windows version. Linux isn't less like OS X than Windows is.
        blkhp19 11y ago
        Just because you can type "sudo" on both doesn't make them similar when it comes to making GUI applications. Again, the frameworks are completely different, meaning that a complete or nearly complete rewrite would be necessary.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
It's possible that since Linux is a smaller percentage of their user base that they prioritized the Mac OS X and Windows ports and will eventually do Linux. If I were them that's what I would do at least.
techwizrd 11y ago
I'm actually working on a Github Desktop "clone" using Electron (so that it'll be "cross-platform"). I'm also working a Gtk+3 version (since I have more experience with that), but I haven't gotten too far.
- westoque 11y ago
  Same here. Although I've already gotten somewhere. Already implemented the "History" tab. Ping me if you want to see it. Planning to open source it soon.
igravious 11y ago
Agreed. It's 2015. No excuse not to put out a Linux version. I thought those days are over. The fact that _Microsoft_ of all companies is releasing multiple developer tools on Linux these days should tell you all you need to know about this bone of contention. I'd have expected more from Github, to be honest, given Atom. On my Ubuntu at the moment the big cross-platform packages I have are: .Net platform, Visual Studio Code, Spotify client, Skype client, Viber client, Chrome, Scrivener, …
technomancy 11y ago
My guess is they don't bother with Linux systems because proper application packaging on Linux OSes is source-centric. They've made the choice not to offer their code as free software, so that would mean it would be a headache to support on systems that value software freedom.
pjmlp 11y ago
Maybe because most GNU/Linux developers seem to be happy using it as a PDP-11 with a VT100? Having used a multiple of desktop systems since the mid-80's, and lots of their main IDE systems, I could never grasp this attitude. And yes, I do my way around Emacs and Elisp (but it comes from MIT Lisp culture).

jvehent 11y ago

While I find this initiative fantastic, it's a bit frustrating that Github, a company that lives on source code being open, does not publish the code of tools like this one.

mrsuprawsm 11y ago
Exactly, it's somewhat ironic.
- mbrock 11y ago
  You could also say that it's ironic that people who are concerned with openness of source code would choose to host it on a proprietary platform. But hey, it's super convenient. (I do it too, but let's not kid ourselves.)
eli 11y ago
I don't mean this as a knock on Github, but I'd argue they are a company that lives on selling corporate licenses and enterprise software to companies that don't want everything to be public.
- totalrobe 11y ago
  Correct. They earn money off of private repositories... not sure how them hosting public projects adds directly to the bottom line besides the obvious marketing benefit and sticky factors.
  - stephendicato 11y ago
    not sure how them hosting public projects adds directly to the bottom line They get a ton of feedback and insight from non-paying users. The usage and feedback can drive both the product and business roadmap for their enterprise offerings. Every developer who enjoys using it for personal or open source is also likely to recommend it to their employer as well. I know I have helped drive adoption in a few organizations.
  - 11y ago

porker 11y ago

Is there a way to clone BitBucket repositories from inside Github Desktop? It looks like they've locked it down to clone from Github only.

Fiskie 11y ago
There doesn't seem to be a way to do so, but if you open a repository cloned elsewhere everything works just fine. It even prompts for your Bitbucket password if you try to push.
patrickread 11y ago
Yea, I was using Github for Mac previously, and all of my non-Github projects ported over to the Github Desktop app. Like the other reply said, you just have to manually clone and the 'Add' it.
toxican 11y ago
You have to manually clone bitbucket stuff in. It supports that properly, with logins and all that. But you can't do it via the UI.

cenaymer 11y ago

I've heard numerous times that Linux's lackluster popularity is due 'chicken and egg' problem in the application space. If a company that gets the maximum possible percentage of Linux users is not willing to support the application for Linux then we can't expect anyone else will even attempt. May be because Linux users are 'smarter' and better off with CLI ;)

xirdstl 11y ago

I use Atlassian Sourcetree as a git GUI on Windows. Does GitHub Desktop do anything different / better?

Fiskie 11y ago
The client itself is very streamlined. Push/Pull operations are swept into a single Sync operation. Merging is as easy as selecting a branch from a dropdown and clicking a button. Things like that. On the downside, utilities like tagging, blame and stash do not seem to exist. The account linking system from the old GitHub client hasn't changed and you can't clone from anywhere that isn't GitHub. Revision history is a bit ~too~ simplified and you can't really see at a glance what branches are deriving from where, and you can only see the history of one branch at a time. I'm sure newbie developers on Github might appreciate the simplified UX/UI, but it's missing a ton of features that are useful in an environment with multiple devs.
- bronson 11y ago
  > Push/Pull operations are swept into a single Sync operation. This feature drove me nuts with their old client. One day they're going to realize that it throws away a very useful Git feature. A few years ago we tried setting up marketing's content creators on the Mac GitHub client. After that, far too many conversations went like this: "Try pulling the new changes." "Um... pull?" "Right, sorry, forgot. Hit sync to pull down the new changes." "But won't that push my mods?" "I suppose... I don't know." "I don't want to push my stuff yet." "OK, dammit. Open a terminal..."
- SZJX 11y ago
  It makes so little sense to make push/pull into one thing. It's likely to do much more harm than good.

leeoniya 11y ago

i wish they would make a decent mobile web interface, the current one is just painful to use. i always have to switch to desktop mode.

farresito 11y ago
Yes, the mobile web interface is quite bad. I mean, it's not horrible; it does the most basic things, but it requires more than one click to see very important things, like commit messages.

mwcampbell 11y ago

The Windows app is still WPF-based and still uses ClickOnce for its installer. The web page claims that this is a new unified app, replacing GitHub for Mac and GitHub for Windows. But it seems to me that there are still two separate apps. I had expected something like a desktop app using web technologies via Electron, like Atom.

pyre 11y ago
Just because the UI layer and installer are using OS-specific libraries doesn't mean it isn't a unified app under the hood.
- mwcampbell 11y ago
  You're right, of course. My comment was premature. But I've looked at both the Windows and Mac apps now, and as far as I can tell, there's no common core besides (probably) libgit2. Each app is implemented using a language runtime and frameworks specific to its host platform. So any unification is only skin-deep. Maybe I'm just envious of companies that have the resources and discipline to keep up the appearance of a unified app while in fact maintaining multiple independent implementations. FWIW, if I were going to implement a unified multi-platform app, I'd use SWT; in fact, I did on a recent project.
kitsunesoba 11y ago
Please no. GitHub for Mac is an extremely solid, smooth, light little native app and I would hate to see it vanish in favor of a heavy chromium-based monstrosity. I don't use Windows but if I did I'd prefer a WPF or .NET app over a chrome wrapper there, too. Common core+separate native UIs will always be the best sort of cross platform app in my eyes.
- mwcampbell 11y ago
  I'm sure you're right about a native Cocoa app feeling nicer than a Chromium-based one. But on Windows, WPF is notorious for poor performance; a Chromium-based app might actually be better on that platform.

AdmiralAsshat 11y ago

Can't access my Windows desktop to look now, but I thought I've had Github Desktop running on my PC for awhile now. Was this previously in beta?

nwienert 11y ago

I've always wanted something where I can see the status of all my projects at once: - Have other people committed things to origin on any of my repos? - Do I have uncommitted changes on any of my repos? - Notifications for when people push Basically this but focusing more on collaboration.

shurcooL 11y ago
> - Do I have uncommitted changes on any of my repos? I wanted to know that too, so I made https://github.com/shurcooL/gostatus https://github.com/shurcooL/gostatus for my Go repos.

cshimmin 11y ago

Can I do anything with this that I can't already do from the website, or is it just the same tools with a nicer native UI? In other words, is this somehow bridging the gap between the site and the git CLI (which could be useful for some of my less tech-savvy collaborators)?

toxican 11y ago

Hasn't this been available for a while now? I know I'd been using it for at least a few months up until recently. I made the switch to Sourcetree the other day and haven't looked back. I never realize how infuriating not being able to see changes in a repo at a glance without clicking into it was until I suddenly could. Can't speak to any more advanced differences though. I'm still very, very new to git.

insulanian 11y ago

I tried GitHub for Windows but found it a bit dumbed down. Switched over to Atlasian's Source Tree and never looked back.

hittaruki 11y ago
Can't help it. I have to mention http://magit.vc/ http://magit.vc/.
dcre 11y ago
I use SourceTree full-time but am keeping an eye on GitUp[1]. The UI is not quite there yet IMO, but it's insanely fast and I love the focus on keyboard shortcuts. [1] http://gitup.co/ http://gitup.co/
- benbristow 11y ago
  Looks amazing. Shame it's only Mac OSX.
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  What in particular do these provide over just using Git Extensions?
donatj 11y ago
Source Tree was irritatingly dumbed down. No built in force push because "it could be dangerous". Switched to Tower and never looked back.
- stinos 11y ago
  You can however add most 'non-dumb' features you need as custom actions so it's only two clicks away. Now they just have to add customizable keyboard shortcuts and I'd be all raving about it, but still I use it everyday mainly for the staging area.
cname 11y ago
SourceTree is really nice overall. To name a few things, I prefer its view of history, its hunk selection UI, and its commit message box (GitHub's is tiny and can't be made much bigger). It's also nice that it supports Mercurial. I had some problems with it keeping changes synced with the file system, though (on Mac OS). E.g., I'd change something in my editor and SourceTree wouldn't pick it up until I reopened the repository in SourceTree. I also prefer a single window like GitHub's app, but that is a minor annoyance. The non-syncing made SourceTree unusable after a while, and I went back to GitHub for Mac. I wish Atlassian would put out an update, because I'd prefer to switch back.

grandalf 11y ago

Github probably considers the "depth" of git use by the average user to be one of its KPIs. Git is extremely powerful, if you are only doing checkouts and commits you are under-utilizing the tool and also underutilizing the service. So it's smart for Github to build tools that lower the bar for a) understanding git, and b) using git's more powerful features. Useful metrics would be things like the percentage of users who use the pull request flow, use it with at least one comment per pull request, have pull requests that get revised, etc. etc. I'd guess that part of the growth potential driving Github's valuation is the notion that git's power features add significant productivity/value and that github is uniquely positioned to let a significantly large number of developers and teams make optimal use of those features for development and collaboration.

arrmn 11y ago
I'm a beginner here so sorry for if it's a stupid question. I work with GitFlow and the only things I use are commits and checkouts, but for what do you use Git? About which powerful features are you talking about, does anyone have a link with some more in depth informations?
- on_and_off 11y ago
  there are many 'minor' features that are occasionally useful. For example, when you make a stupid mistake, reflog can make you gain a couple of minutes.
- camenk 11y ago
  I think we use a lot of PR flow in our team. It's really powerful if you collaborate or plan to collaborate with others as it allows you to get together and look at the commits to ensure code quality (in theory). Even the command line git itself is really nice because it gives you the current condition of your repo and suggestion on what you can do next. You have changes, if you want to commit use this command or if you want to add use this command.
- coldpie 11y ago
  Some features I use: Cherry-picking commits across branches. Merging branches. Rebases for forward-porting your work onto a new upstream. Bisects for determining which commit introduced a bug. Push/pull for sharing. Format-patch for sending patches around. Submodules.

bamazizi 11y ago

What's the advantage to SourceTree? aside from nicer ui. I wish it had the code review, commenting, issue tracking of the web app in a desktop application, all in one place. It's a pain to move constantly between the editor, CLI/SourceTree and Github web app for everyday tasks.

marpstar 11y ago
I don't even think that this new client supports anything but GitHub. Their previous Windows client didn't.
- qcz 11y ago
  Yes, it did, but it had very basic functionality. The new client still supports non-GitHub repositories (tried with private GitLab repos).
- softawre 11y ago
  I'm using this new client against Bitbucket right now. Just added local repos that I had already cloned, and it's just following the .git/config like any good git client does.

XzetaU8 11y ago

"Why don't you support the Linux platform? At this time, we're focused on optimizing the Mac and Windows experience. We're always thinking about potential improvements for the diverse needs of our users, though!" https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/why-don-t-you-support-the-linux-platform/ https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/why-don-t-you-s... Something tells me that the Linux version will come up later.

matthewbauer 11y ago
Most Linux users are going to be inclined to use the command line. Even with these new additions GitHub Desktop's features are much smaller than what is possible with the command line.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
thawkins 11y ago
Once the universe has cooled to absolute zero, that is a corporate non answer. "Go away" dressed up in a party frock.

koyote 11y ago

So does anyone know what they used to build the 'unified' app UI? If I remember rightly they used WPF on Windows in earlier versions. Is the UI now abstracted using a third-party framework/inhouse framework?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
0xffffabcd 11y ago
They're still using WPF on Windows.
amadeusw 11y ago
The UI looks doable with WPF. I would love to see the code and learn from it
xd1936 11y ago
If it's using WPF, does that mean that it requires .NET?
- skeletonjelly 11y ago
  Yep. Though AFAIK .NET is included with Windows these days
justboxing 11y ago
If they switch to the open source & cross platform .Net Core, then the 'Unified' app UI is possible. http://dotnet.github.io/core/ http://dotnet.github.io/core/

BoppreH 11y ago

Is this related to the recent Github For Windows redesign? It used to be a great product, but the last version made some really odd UI changes and the whole thing became 10x slower. Github For Windows used to be as important to my workflow as my code editor. I absolutely loved the "click to select which lines to commit" feature, and I'm pretty sure it improved the quality of my commits drastically. And it was constantly improving. A few weeks ago came a new version that changed everything. Previous updates used to be incremental, but this one seemed to replace everything at once. Overall the UI was still good, even though important parts became hidden behind tabs. But the performance... Oh god the performance. Syncing repos became a multi-minute operation. Listing commits went from instantaneous to taking several seconds. It became so unusable I switched back to Linux for development.

bluetidepro 11y ago

When I saw "Desktop" in the name, I was really hoping this also brought some of the web features to the app. Things such as being able to view/edit the wiki, or issues of the repo. I wonder if that is in their long term plans for the app at all? That would be really awesome.

dkuntz2 11y ago
The wiki is just a git repository of markdown files. You can grab that and use a local text editor if you want, though that's not integration with the app (but I'm also partial to using the command line).
prayerslayer 11y ago
So much this. Github for Mac is quite good already for commiting and pull-requesting. I could stop using my browser (for Github, at least) if they put issue management (open, close, view, comments) in there too. Would be awesome and a more unified experience.

rjv 11y ago

I'd love to see more development in the Git GUI space; a GUI really enabled git adoption and comprehension on my team. SourceTree has been my go-to for over a year now and it generally gets the job done, but it can be flakey at times (on Windows) and it seems like Atlassian has taken a hiatus from active development. I hope Atlassian takes up the reins again - this tool is pretty essential for me and I'd be happy to pay for it.

Akkuma 11y ago
Check SmartGit out. I've used it for years and love it.
slantyyz 11y ago
>> SourceTree has been my go-to for over a year now and it generally gets the job done, but it can be flakey at times (on Windows) I've had the same experience. SourceTree has gotten better since I've started using it, but I frequently get hangs on commits and pushes on one of my machines. So much to the point that I downgraded to an older version of SourceTree. One of the only things I miss after switching from OSX to Windows last year is Gitbox - http://www.gitboxapp.com/ http://www.gitboxapp.com/ - it's not free, but for what I do, it really did the trick. This new desktop version of Github looks a lot better than its predecessor, but I need to play with it more. It does feel a lot more like Gitbox to me than SourceTree.
kannonboy 11y ago
I'm Tim, a dev at Atlassian. I just thought I'd chime in to let you know we are absolutely taking up the reins on SourceTree again! In fact, we're in the process of growing out our team. You can read a little more about it on the ST blog from earlier this year: http://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2015/02/25/were-just-getting-started-with-sourcetree http://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2015/02/25/were-just-getting-s.... We are aware of the performance issues affecting Windows users with certain repository shapes and have our backlog prioritized accordingly. I haven't had much of a chance to play with GitHub Desktop yet, but it can only be a good thing for the users of all Git clients - nothing like a bit of healthy competition :) However, SourceTree's focus will remain on providing the best possible experience for professional teams using Git (and Mercurial).

the_ancient 11y ago

For Mac or Windows.... it is just insulting that GitHub continues to Treat linux has a second class citizen when with out Linux Git would not be a project...

comboy 11y ago
In their defense, I don't see many linux users choosing GUI app over command line to handle git (unless they have it integrated in their IDE)
- r3bl 11y ago
  Well, to be honest, as a Linux user, I would definitely consider using GitHub's own GUI application instead of some application developed by a third party.
- yellowapple 11y ago
  As a Linux user: I very much would at least try it. Magit works great for the git repos themselves, but when I'm on my work machine (a Macbook) I tend to use Github's Mac client in order to handle things Github-specific (particularly cloning and handling pull requests).
- mhw 11y ago
  I use git primarily on Linux, but I don't use an IDE. I frequently use 'git gui' to prepare commits - I particularly like the ability to select individual lines from a diff to include in a commit, breaking apart multiple changes to the same file when necessary. I also use gitk a lot. I'm very comfortable using the command line, but it's not correct to assume that command line users wouldn't want a GUI tool as well.
hueving 11y ago
They don't participate in the open source community. They're similar to Apple in that they take open source stuff and build a closed ecosystem on top of it.
- 11y ago

lewisl9029 11y ago

I've been using the beta for a while and have found it to be quite nice. Simple operations are quick and intuitive. If you need anything more advanced, a git shell for the current project is just 2 clicks away. Having all the visual diffs readily available in the client before committing is quite convenient, as is being able to push your branch and open a pull request for it at the press of a button. I'm hoping issues and PR management is next on the plate. You can open PRs from the client right now, but to review and merge them you'd still need to open a browser.

tychuz 11y ago

It has been out for a while (I guess in beta form), atleast for Windows. Still using GitExtensions. This has a nice interface for hobby projects, but when working with "enterprise" huge projects at work - it lags noticeably.

rcarmo 11y ago

There's an UX/affordance issue with merges. Took me a while to figure out how do do them via the UI, it's not immediately obvious that the side pane (which tries to take you to the web site for submitting pull requests) has nothing to do with local merges, which are now accomplished via an option that only appears when you're comparing branches (on the new timeline/graph thingy).

krisgenre 11y ago

Hmm.. are there really no good cross platform GUI toolkits? Why is Linux being ignored often even by companies that target developers?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jimktrains2 11y ago
Maybe if you're deving on linux you just want the CLI anyway? I don't know if I'm abnormal or not, but I've _never_ wanted a git gui and really don't see the need for it at all.
- krisgenre 11y ago
  Ya, CLI is great but for people like me who mix both ( like using gitg for committing ), GUIs could be handy. There are lot of Java (or Android) developers who don't want to switch to Linux precisely for this reason.
  - TsiCClawOfLight 11y ago
    But those Java and android developers will use android studio, IntelliJ or eclipse, which all have good guis. I don't see how that is an issue in this case.
kitsunesoba 11y ago
I'd say that part of the problem is that there is no "right" way to develop for Linux. There's a multitude of choices available at every turn when developing software for Linux, and while this is its strength, it's also its weakness. On Windows and especially OS X there are established "right ways" that can easily be deferred to. Trying to provide support for Linux software could also potentially be nightmarish given the innumerable factors at play. There's no end to the number of ways any given Linux box may be set up.
- 11y ago

nedludd 11y ago

What's the difference between this and the former "Github" app?

paublyrne 11y ago

I've been using Github on Mac for a while now. It won't do all the fancy things that the CLI will, but I love it for the ability to break up large bunches of files into separate commits, for when I forget to commit for a while or my local repo gets a little messy.

TsiCClawOfLight 11y ago
Isn't this something you could do easily via an IDE or, say, magit?
unfunco 11y ago
git add -p

yeldarb 11y ago

The new tutorial is pretty spiffy. It teaches you the branch-commit-pull request workflow by actually taking you through the process on a mock repo!

msluyter 11y ago

Just downloaded it and tried it out. Looks pretty nice, but the history view isn't populating when I try to use it for github enterprise projects (I did login successfully). I'm just seeing a completely black rectangle and no commits. One theory I have is that our default upstream branch isn't master, but I'm not sure where to set that in the app. Anyone else noticed this?

justboxing 11y ago

In Options -> Privacy, why is the 'Help us improve by sending anonymous usage data' checked by default? Shouldn't it be opt-in and not opt-out?

jchomali 11y ago

This is awesome!

untilHellbanned 11y ago

What to do with the scary message? Does this affect the OS version of git or just the version that this Github application uses? OS X 10.9 and later includes Git, so GitHub Desktop will no longer install Git as part of its command line tools. The version of Git you have installed through GitHub Desktop is no longer supported. It's recommended that you uninstall it as soon as possible.

kstenerud 11y ago

Oh wonderful. Installed it, and now none of the git repos I pointed it to are recognized by git command line anymore :/

gcb0 11y ago

those wankers should work on getting diffs to actually show on their site. hate when i have to code review some contributor and the site just says "oh, i will not bother showing any change on that file"... so i have to download their branch, run diff on the awesome `meld`, which kicks their visualization anyway, but then the only good thing about github: inline comments on code reviews... goes away. i have to either email or add lose comments on the code review panel with what i think. but hey, now we can have the same crappy experience on (selected) desktops! hooray! well, at least you managed to get me to write an offense on a public forum. that is something. you wankers.

jaytaylor 11y ago

This is confusing to me. Why is it "GitHub Desktop is now available" rather "GitHub Desktop App Updated"? What is actually new here? I know the native GitHub GUI app has been available for a number of years before now.

boardwaalk 11y ago

Well, that update turned the app into flickering, unresponsive mess on my Mac (10.11). And I have to use some sort of old school contact form to report a bug to GitHub? I'm a bit incredulous. I like GitHub for the basic "see what you're committing and commit it" work flow, using the command line otherwise, but I suppose I'll switch to Sourcetree for now.

gideon_b 11y ago

I was really hoping this would be a native app for the collaborative/social aspects of github.

lucisferre 11y ago

My initial impression is that I like it, but I'm confused what "git sync" is. I've never done a "sync" before so I'm uncertain what will happen when I click the button. Seriously, I get it, people don't love git's choice of verbs and syntax. Picking different ones arbitrarily helps no one however.

andyfleming 11y ago

I really like the GitHub desktop app. Although, I honestly I could care less about the fancy new graph feature. I would rather they had added a couple of simpler, more useful features: • the ability to organize repos by organization or with custom folders/lists • the option to open a repo in a new window by right-clicking on one from the list in the left column

shurcooL 11y ago

The new layout looks great! But there's an immediately obvious bug, the middle pane keeps resizing to become wider every time you switch between repos. Also, one large repo I had simply shows 0 commits. It worked just fine before. And another even larger repo works fine.

shurcooL 11y ago
An update, I tried to remove the problematic git repo and re-added it, and now history shows up okay.

jschulenklopper 11y ago

I wonder why, after downloading and installing the GitHub Desktop application I should use my GitHub account and password to connect the client to GitHub (with no other way available)? Would it not have been better if GitHub Desktop was a seperate application that gets permissions (for example via OAuth 2.0) as an application in the "Authorized applications" section of the GitHub profile? Or am I missing something here?