3 ms·

I've had the exact opposite experience. I've had to bail out cli purists because they just can't see what went wrong. Objectively git kraken has more visual in

I've had the exact opposite experience. I've had to bail out cli purists because they just can't see what went wrong. Objectively git kraken has more visual information density. To get the same information on the cli requires multiple commands and the user has to hold the information I'm their head between the commands. Git kraken's buttons are also tightly correlated to commands and you can even bring up a window that shows what cli commands are being run under the hood.

rjzzleep 4y ago
What does Gitkraken have that lazygit and tig don't have? The fundamental assumption here is that the the CLI doesn't have GUI's.
- ziml77 4y ago
  Those are TUIs, not CLIs. You're conflating "CLI" and "terminal".
pizza234 4y ago
> Objectively git kraken has more visual information density. To get the same information on the cli requires multiple commands and the user has to hold the information I'm their head between the commands. Can you give a precise example? The cli has support to using visual tools for diff/merge, so one doesn't need to use git via gui in order to use graphical interfaces where effective.
duped 4y ago
Gitkraken has too much information density, since it weights nearly everything equally or alphabetically. Next to impossible to see what you or your colleagues are working on when there are a lot of branches in flight and half of what Gitkraken is showing you are merged or abandoned branches you don't care about. It also gives up and freezes when opening large repos, like my small company's monorepo. I canceled my subscription and returned to the CLI + VS Codes native SCM UI because GitKraken is now useless in my work environment. Never mind the startup time is in minutes. And no, I'm not paying more for the ability to write a bug report and get it to them (their support is functionally non existent) Great for a tiny project. Awful for companies. Not worth the money given how much more time it takes for me to do my work than use the CLI. Sorry for the strong words, GitKraken is just a great example of bad design.

rjzzleep 4y ago

What does Gitkraken have that lazygit and tig don't have? The fundamental assumption here is that the the CLI doesn't have GUI's.

ziml77 4y ago
Those are TUIs, not CLIs. You're conflating "CLI" and "terminal".

pizza234 4y ago

> Objectively git kraken has more visual information density. To get the same information on the cli requires multiple commands and the user has to hold the information I'm their head between the commands. Can you give a precise example? The cli has support to using visual tools for diff/merge, so one doesn't need to use git via gui in order to use graphical interfaces where effective.

duped 4y ago

Gitkraken has too much information density, since it weights nearly everything equally or alphabetically. Next to impossible to see what you or your colleagues are working on when there are a lot of branches in flight and half of what Gitkraken is showing you are merged or abandoned branches you don't care about. It also gives up and freezes when opening large repos, like my small company's monorepo. I canceled my subscription and returned to the CLI + VS Codes native SCM UI because GitKraken is now useless in my work environment. Never mind the startup time is in minutes. And no, I'm not paying more for the ability to write a bug report and get it to them (their support is functionally non existent) Great for a tiny project. Awful for companies. Not worth the money given how much more time it takes for me to do my work than use the CLI. Sorry for the strong words, GitKraken is just a great example of bad design.