4 ms·

Zero-configuration submodules with auto-update in Gitbox

39 points by oleganza 15y ago

oleganza 15y ago
The coolest feature is that you can pull, checkout a commit or reset a branch and submodules will be updated automatically no questions asked. Unless, of course, you've been working on them and they are not in a clean state. This makes debugging much easier as you jump through commits with just a single click. I don't understand why everybody else is adding a lot of options and preferences even to the simplest functions like pull/push to their Git clients. In Gitbox you only configure URLs and then just interact with the same UI without jumping to extra windows all the time.
- falling 15y ago
  Oleg, your vision is exactly what I like about Gitbox. Git is a toolbox to create your own VCS, Gitbox takes a stance and uses those tools to define a usage model, without tying itself to tradition. It doesn't work for hardcore users and even I sometimes fall back (cringing) to the CLI, but I really appreciate it. Feature request: easier way to switch local and remote branches with the keyboard. Currently I use Cmd-Shift-? to get to the menu.
moe 15y ago
Nothing against gitbox but I find it a bit of a tragedy that they can advertise with making submodules bearable in first place. This stuff really needs an overhaul in core-git. The CLI experience is indeed so terrible that most people avoid submodules altogether.
- oleganza 15y ago
  My personal problem with git was inherent inefficiency of CLI. E.g. I was typing "gs" to see the status almost after every little command. In Gitbox you just see the status. Similar thing with submodules: you need to get in and out, verify the status of a submodule and its parent. In Gitbox you just see the whole picture and click a single button to do something useful. My question is not to git CLI guys (they are doing great job, by the way), but to others like Tower and SourceTree: why in the world they complicate things so much? If one needs a very flexible/configurable environment, git CLI is just fine.
  - moe 15y ago
    To me the CLI is about fine. It's just the submodules that are poorly executed and break all sorts of expectations. The mini-primer on submodule-WTFs: "must be executed in root-directory", no auto-clone/update of submodules, incomplete info about submodules in status-commands, manual maintenance of .gitmodules, a wide range of irritating/misleading failure modes and error messages... It's really no surprise you hardly ever see a submodule on e.g. github, even on projects where it would make sense. The maintenance headache usually dwarves all potential benefits.
  - jscore 15y ago
    I've tried both and much prefer SourceTree. It's a fantastic piece of software and find all the options intuitive and nicely executed.
- bryanlarsen 15y ago
  I just wish they would merge in apenwarr's git-subtree. It's so much better than submodules for most use cases.
nestlequ1k 15y ago
nice. would love to use gitbox but it lacks the most basic functionality of gitx. easy inline browsing of staged changes / diffs you have to click on every file to open up a diff in order to preview changes before checkin
po 15y ago
If I remember correctly, last time I tried gitbox, I couldn't use it for more than a few minutes because it showed commits as a linear history. I understand that they want to hide complexity, but that's exactly the complexity I need to see and understand. I need a tree-based view like gitx or the github network view to keep track of what's going on with my team. That along with line-by-line staging of commits are the killer features for me. I still use the original version of gitx because it is simple as possible but still has these two features.

39 points by oleganza 15y ago

The coolest feature is that you can pull, checkout a commit or reset a branch and submodules will be updated automatically no questions asked. Unless, of course, you've been working on them and they are not in a clean state. This makes debugging much easier as you jump through commits with just a single click. I don't understand why everybody else is adding a lot of options and preferences even to the simplest functions like pull/push to their Git clients. In Gitbox you only configure URLs and then just interact with the same UI without jumping to extra windows all the time.

falling 15y ago
Oleg, your vision is exactly what I like about Gitbox. Git is a toolbox to create your own VCS, Gitbox takes a stance and uses those tools to define a usage model, without tying itself to tradition. It doesn't work for hardcore users and even I sometimes fall back (cringing) to the CLI, but I really appreciate it. Feature request: easier way to switch local and remote branches with the keyboard. Currently I use Cmd-Shift-? to get to the menu.

moe 15y ago

Nothing against gitbox but I find it a bit of a tragedy that they can advertise with making submodules bearable in first place. This stuff really needs an overhaul in core-git. The CLI experience is indeed so terrible that most people avoid submodules altogether.

oleganza 15y ago
My personal problem with git was inherent inefficiency of CLI. E.g. I was typing "gs" to see the status almost after every little command. In Gitbox you just see the status. Similar thing with submodules: you need to get in and out, verify the status of a submodule and its parent. In Gitbox you just see the whole picture and click a single button to do something useful. My question is not to git CLI guys (they are doing great job, by the way), but to others like Tower and SourceTree: why in the world they complicate things so much? If one needs a very flexible/configurable environment, git CLI is just fine.
- moe 15y ago
  To me the CLI is about fine. It's just the submodules that are poorly executed and break all sorts of expectations. The mini-primer on submodule-WTFs: "must be executed in root-directory", no auto-clone/update of submodules, incomplete info about submodules in status-commands, manual maintenance of .gitmodules, a wide range of irritating/misleading failure modes and error messages... It's really no surprise you hardly ever see a submodule on e.g. github, even on projects where it would make sense. The maintenance headache usually dwarves all potential benefits.
- jscore 15y ago
  I've tried both and much prefer SourceTree. It's a fantastic piece of software and find all the options intuitive and nicely executed.
bryanlarsen 15y ago
I just wish they would merge in apenwarr's git-subtree. It's so much better than submodules for most use cases.

nestlequ1k 15y ago

nice. would love to use gitbox but it lacks the most basic functionality of gitx. easy inline browsing of staged changes / diffs you have to click on every file to open up a diff in order to preview changes before checkin

po 15y ago

If I remember correctly, last time I tried gitbox, I couldn't use it for more than a few minutes because it showed commits as a linear history. I understand that they want to hide complexity, but that's exactly the complexity I need to see and understand. I need a tree-based view like gitx or the github network view to keep track of what's going on with my team. That along with line-by-line staging of commits are the killer features for me. I still use the original version of gitx because it is simple as possible but still has these two features.