5 ms·

Show HN: I made a tool, create GitHub Repository from local directory directly

38 points by shunak 4y ago

Create a remote repository directly from your local folder to GitHub.

OJFord 4y ago
I think this is also possible with GitHub's own 'gh' tool? I'm afk, but iirc it's `gh repo create`.
jasonjmcghee 4y ago
Nice job taking the time to build it out! For what it's worth, "gh" works quite well and has all kinds of functionality. "gh re --create" would replicate the functionality here as far as I can tell.
codazoda 4y ago
Nice little tool. This has reminded me that I should put all the initial GitHub commands, for pushing an entire directory, into an alias, script, or binary. Or, learn the gh command, apparently.
cmckn 4y ago
I love a little bash script as much as anyone, but the official GitHub CLI is a better choice here, as it handles authentication with the API much more smoothly. Even if you just used it to make authenticated API calls, it’d be preferable to curl. You also don’t have any error handling.
- masukomi 4y ago
  this. i'm all for little utility scripts like this but it'd be much easier to do with gh Also, i wouldn't recommend a thing that you have to copy into your repo. Better to just have wrappers like this that live in your personal bin directory and get run from within the folder. so, to summarize: 1. nifty idea 2. most of the steps are easier via gh 3. don't copy scripts into a dir, to run them. just leave them in your path.
  - shunak 4y ago
    Thx ! I'll modify this programme for the better one.
- codesniperjoe 4y ago
  In general I would tend to agree, but have lately took a look at the gh dependencies this tool draws in today? [0] This is not a (classic) unix cli tool, as it was some month before. Do you think anyone will be ever able to make a codereview? Like done for git [1]? [0] https://github.com/cli/cli/blob/trunk/go.mod https://github.com/cli/cli/blob/trunk/go.mod [1] https://x41-dsec.de/security/research/news/2023/01/17/git-security-audit-ostif https://x41-dsec.de/security/research/news/2023/01/17/git-se... On the other side: a simple and easy to understand plaintext curl one-liner.
notpushkin 4y ago
I love that GitLab allows you to just push your repository directly: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/working_with_projects.html#create-a-new-project-with-git-push https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/working_with_project... Unfortunately, I keep forgetting about that and keep creating the project by hand (also gives me some time to pause and think about naming / description, and set repo visibility for a public project). UPD: Gitea / Forgejo takes it one step further and allows you to specify visibility when pushing like this: git push -o repo.private=false -u git@git.example.com:example/hello master (Doesn't seem to work on Codeberg, though) https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/push-options/ https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/push-options/
- codetrotter 4y ago
  This page is not readable on my iPhone :( Here is a more readable version of that same page: https://archive.is/nRpOi#create-a-new-project-with-git-push https://archive.is/nRpOi#create-a-new-project-with-git-push
  - notpushkin 4y ago
    Huh, that's weird – I've just checked and it looks fine on my Android, and in Safari in responsive design mode. :thinking:
- smaudet 4y ago
  I think this tool has merit where gh doesn't, in that it can/could integrate with other hosts. Github is a cancer on the git community - I know we tend to like "easy, fast, convenient" so mega-providers like GH or Gitlab are bound to occur, but we invariably find the downsides (centralized censorship, product placement, loss of features or random security vulns due to companies forgetting that the "simple" system is actually built on something complex) in the longterm. I'm not saying GH shouldn't exist, what would be even cooler is if a tool like wfh, in addition to pushing folders to github/gitlab, could push folders to arbitrary servers - if you own the domain/server and have the appropriate access, brand new git repo auto-hosted.
  - 4y ago
avmich 4y ago
VAX VMS had a concept of file versioning in their file system, looks like this tool goes towards that direction.
cjk 4y ago
I prefer: brew install hub alias git=hub git create [-p] [[org/][repo name]]
- robin_reala 4y ago
  You’re probably better off with gh rather than hub these days; it’s the official way forwards for CLI Github access. https://cli.github.com/ https://cli.github.com/
jotaen 4y ago
One feedback/idea in regards to the API: instead of using positional arguments, the parameters could also be named flags, i.e. `wfh.sh --user shunak --visibility public`. That’s slightly more verbose, but it would make it easier for the parameters to be optional. For example, the Github username could read its default from an environment variable, because in many cases it probably stays the same anyway. Or, if you don’t specify `--visibility`, then it defaults to `public` (just like on Github). That way, you could also optionally offer to set the repo name to something different than the folder name, e.g. `--name some-arbitrary-name`.
lloydatkinson 4y ago
On this topic one of the most bewildering and frustrating trends I see is when people create a GitHub repository, but don't check include README.md. This results in a totally blank repository and just a page of git commands to run to set it up yourself locally, set origin, commit some junk file to get started, and then finally push. This takes a couple of minutes. Compared to: Create GitHub repository, have README.md included, and then just clone it locally. 20 seconds.

38 points by shunak 4y ago

Create a remote repository directly from your local folder to GitHub.

OJFord 4y ago

I think this is also possible with GitHub's own 'gh' tool? I'm afk, but iirc it's `gh repo create`.

jasonjmcghee 4y ago

Nice job taking the time to build it out! For what it's worth, "gh" works quite well and has all kinds of functionality. "gh re --create" would replicate the functionality here as far as I can tell.

codazoda 4y ago

Nice little tool. This has reminded me that I should put all the initial GitHub commands, for pushing an entire directory, into an alias, script, or binary. Or, learn the gh command, apparently.

cmckn 4y ago

I love a little bash script as much as anyone, but the official GitHub CLI is a better choice here, as it handles authentication with the API much more smoothly. Even if you just used it to make authenticated API calls, it’d be preferable to curl. You also don’t have any error handling.

masukomi 4y ago
this. i'm all for little utility scripts like this but it'd be much easier to do with gh Also, i wouldn't recommend a thing that you have to copy into your repo. Better to just have wrappers like this that live in your personal bin directory and get run from within the folder. so, to summarize: 1. nifty idea 2. most of the steps are easier via gh 3. don't copy scripts into a dir, to run them. just leave them in your path.
- shunak 4y ago
  Thx ! I'll modify this programme for the better one.
codesniperjoe 4y ago
In general I would tend to agree, but have lately took a look at the gh dependencies this tool draws in today? [0] This is not a (classic) unix cli tool, as it was some month before. Do you think anyone will be ever able to make a codereview? Like done for git [1]? [0] https://github.com/cli/cli/blob/trunk/go.mod https://github.com/cli/cli/blob/trunk/go.mod [1] https://x41-dsec.de/security/research/news/2023/01/17/git-security-audit-ostif https://x41-dsec.de/security/research/news/2023/01/17/git-se... On the other side: a simple and easy to understand plaintext curl one-liner.

notpushkin 4y ago

I love that GitLab allows you to just push your repository directly: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/working_with_projects.html#create-a-new-project-with-git-push https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/working_with_project... Unfortunately, I keep forgetting about that and keep creating the project by hand (also gives me some time to pause and think about naming / description, and set repo visibility for a public project). UPD: Gitea / Forgejo takes it one step further and allows you to specify visibility when pushing like this: git push -o repo.private=false -u git@git.example.com:example/hello master (Doesn't seem to work on Codeberg, though) https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/push-options/ https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/push-options/

codetrotter 4y ago
This page is not readable on my iPhone :( Here is a more readable version of that same page: https://archive.is/nRpOi#create-a-new-project-with-git-push https://archive.is/nRpOi#create-a-new-project-with-git-push
- notpushkin 4y ago
  Huh, that's weird – I've just checked and it looks fine on my Android, and in Safari in responsive design mode. :thinking:
smaudet 4y ago
I think this tool has merit where gh doesn't, in that it can/could integrate with other hosts. Github is a cancer on the git community - I know we tend to like "easy, fast, convenient" so mega-providers like GH or Gitlab are bound to occur, but we invariably find the downsides (centralized censorship, product placement, loss of features or random security vulns due to companies forgetting that the "simple" system is actually built on something complex) in the longterm. I'm not saying GH shouldn't exist, what would be even cooler is if a tool like wfh, in addition to pushing folders to github/gitlab, could push folders to arbitrary servers - if you own the domain/server and have the appropriate access, brand new git repo auto-hosted.
- 4y ago

avmich 4y ago

VAX VMS had a concept of file versioning in their file system, looks like this tool goes towards that direction.

cjk 4y ago

I prefer: brew install hub alias git=hub git create [-p] [[org/][repo name]]

robin_reala 4y ago
You’re probably better off with gh rather than hub these days; it’s the official way forwards for CLI Github access. https://cli.github.com/ https://cli.github.com/

jotaen 4y ago

One feedback/idea in regards to the API: instead of using positional arguments, the parameters could also be named flags, i.e. `wfh.sh --user shunak --visibility public`. That’s slightly more verbose, but it would make it easier for the parameters to be optional. For example, the Github username could read its default from an environment variable, because in many cases it probably stays the same anyway. Or, if you don’t specify `--visibility`, then it defaults to `public` (just like on Github). That way, you could also optionally offer to set the repo name to something different than the folder name, e.g. `--name some-arbitrary-name`.

lloydatkinson 4y ago

On this topic one of the most bewildering and frustrating trends I see is when people create a GitHub repository, but don't check include README.md. This results in a totally blank repository and just a page of git commands to run to set it up yourself locally, set origin, commit some junk file to get started, and then finally push. This takes a couple of minutes. Compared to: Create GitHub repository, have README.md included, and then just clone it locally. 20 seconds.