4 ms·
Ask HN: If you were writing Git now, what would you change?
Assuming you were writing git now, what would you do differently? I would appreciate creative, out-of-the-box thoughts that go beyond current git concepts. What should modern, intuitive, effective source/version control look like, from your perspective?
- gravypod 11y agoI'd write a GUI. The only reason it hasn't taken over the market is that it doesn't "just work". Ungit[0] is a project that makes good attempts at fixing the UX problems with git by making an easy-as-hell UI for it. If git came with something as fully featured as the command interface but in a good UI format then it would take over. There would be no reason to use anything else. [0] - https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit
- viraptor 11y agoThree things only: - Completely redesign the CLI options, parameters, etc. Make it all consistent and give each separate command a clear single function. Stealing a lot of that from Mercurial would help. - Write the backend as a library, so there's one canonical, offical library anyone can link to. - Make the repo states officially described / explicitly saved. There should be .git/state which tells you exactly what's going on. For example don't use ad-hoc .git/rebase-merge, .git/MERGE_MODE, etc. It should also prevent stupid mistakes unless forced, like "commit --amend" while resolving merge conflict, or mixing up rebase/merge states.