4 ms·
I agree (http://www.quora.com/What-online-tools-do-scientists-wish-existed-to-facilitate-their-work/answer/Marius-Kempe http://www.quora.com/What-online-tools-d
by mariuskempe 16y ago
I agree (http://www.quora.com/What-online-tools-do-scientists-wish-existed-to-facilitate-their-work/answer/Marius-Kempe http://www.quora.com/What-online-tools-do-scientists-wish-ex...). Why don't we just start using GitHub itself to do this and go from there? The pain points will suggest ways that a real science-focused github could improve on GitHub itself.
- Ruudjah 16y agoThe problem is currently GUI. There are no good GUI's to work with git. Windows and Mac OS X have some GUI tools scratching the surface of what's possible with git, but none come close in opening up the full possibilities of git. Linux has a few very alpha, specific (like showing branches) GUI tools. If we want non-programmers to use git, we need GUI's to instantly visualize the state, commands and other possibilities. No non-programmer is going to learn git using a CLI.
- mcrider 16y agoPerhaps if it caught on enough. There are many people that had to learn LaTeX who were not programmers, which is IMHO not a trivial feat. Not that I'm disagreeing with you--But making git point-and-clickable doesn't strike me as being very simple.
- alextp 16y agoI agree. I think that github is such a good tool to interact with git repos that if they made a version that can work locally (the main difference is explicitly dealing with the index and the current tree) I'd use it to manage git projects in a heartbeat.