4 ms·

What's the canonical gitx repository these days? Everyone I know uses a different fork, much to my dismay.

by phillmv 15y ago

veidr 15y ago
Part of the reason is that the commercial clients have finally eclipsed gitx in power, ease-of-use, and prettiness. Notably, SourceTree (what mainly use) and Tower (if the incomprehensible one-repo-at-a-time limit isn't a dealbreaker) now compare favorably to gitx in most ways. So I don't recommend gitx anymore, but from what I hear Gitx (L) is a fairly active and popular fork: http://gitx.laullon.com http://gitx.laullon.com
- carterschonwald 15y ago
  Yup. Thats the currently devd version of gitx. There's been the odd bug hiccup, but those have been fixed and it getting moderate dev work.
- sjs 15y ago
  Been using that for a few weeks, it's great. I previously used brotherbard's experimental branch from github and he told me about it. I use GitX for committing and browsing and the command line for the rest. None of the GUIs have blown me away yet, but deep GH integration is a big plus for me so GH for Mac might join my workflow.
nupark2 15y ago
That's a pretty telling irony. Git seems to have broken down the social contracts around forking that kept most opensource projects cohesive. Unless the project has a great deal or inertia, it is difficult to remain the canonical source, and the project effectively disperses.
- phillmv 15y ago
  You're not wrong but I'd say the degree to which it has eliminated forking costs far outweigh the occasional confusion. If you think about it, this is basically 1) a marketing problem and 2) would be solved instantly should GitHub introduce a better 'network' visualization.
  - nupark2 15y ago
    I actually think it's github's fault to begin with: - Projects should be top-level in the github namespace, not people. - Forks should live underneath their source project, and should not be top-level projects themselves.

What's the canonical gitx repository these days? Everyone I know uses a different fork, much to my dismay.

by phillmv 15y ago

What's the canonical gitx repository these days? Everyone I know uses a different fork, much to my dismay.

veidr 15y ago

Part of the reason is that the commercial clients have finally eclipsed gitx in power, ease-of-use, and prettiness. Notably, SourceTree (what mainly use) and Tower (if the incomprehensible one-repo-at-a-time limit isn't a dealbreaker) now compare favorably to gitx in most ways. So I don't recommend gitx anymore, but from what I hear Gitx (L) is a fairly active and popular fork: http://gitx.laullon.com http://gitx.laullon.com

carterschonwald 15y ago
Yup. Thats the currently devd version of gitx. There's been the odd bug hiccup, but those have been fixed and it getting moderate dev work.
sjs 15y ago
Been using that for a few weeks, it's great. I previously used brotherbard's experimental branch from github and he told me about it. I use GitX for committing and browsing and the command line for the rest. None of the GUIs have blown me away yet, but deep GH integration is a big plus for me so GH for Mac might join my workflow.

nupark2 15y ago

That's a pretty telling irony. Git seems to have broken down the social contracts around forking that kept most opensource projects cohesive. Unless the project has a great deal or inertia, it is difficult to remain the canonical source, and the project effectively disperses.

phillmv 15y ago
You're not wrong but I'd say the degree to which it has eliminated forking costs far outweigh the occasional confusion. If you think about it, this is basically 1) a marketing problem and 2) would be solved instantly should GitHub introduce a better 'network' visualization.
- nupark2 15y ago
  I actually think it's github's fault to begin with: - Projects should be top-level in the github namespace, not people. - Forks should live underneath their source project, and should not be top-level projects themselves.