4 ms·
I tend to agree with you that most people don't need that power but I think the problem is just that it IS a CLI interface, not that it's a particularly bad one
by zajd 10y ago
I tend to agree with you that most people don't need that power but I think the problem is just that it IS a CLI interface, not that it's a particularly bad one. A GUI is the perfect tool to deal with discoverability and providing an easier interface for non-technical users. A CLI wrapper is just making things more confusing. I don't really understand what problem gitless seems to be solving...
- weberc2 10y agoI disagree; `hg` is a CLI as well, but it's far simpler and safer than `git`. That said, I have far more experience with git than hg. Further, gitless itself is a cli, and it's also simpler than git.
- zajd 10y agoIf simplicity was the goal of command line interfaces they wouldn't exist. This is not ls or cat, nor is it trying to be. hg might have a better CLI than git, but it still doesn't justify something like gitless. You need a really compelling reason to layer another level of abstraction on top of git and from what I can tell, having branches be full sets of working files isn't really a good enough reason to make that switch. Where are the improvements in Gitless exactly? Pretty telling they don't even list them in anywhere.
- ori_b 10y agoI have experience with both daily, and I mostly just don't notice any meaningful difference. Especially with the bookmark extension.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]