4 ms·

I beg to differ. I wouldn't praise magit if it was just another power user UI that required to become a black belt to do anything. magit is a (somehow) thin la

I beg to differ. I wouldn't praise magit if it was just another power user UI that required to become a black belt to do anything. magit is a (somehow) thin layer on top of git output, and the brilliance comes from - keeps the information similar to git cli - depending on the context it allows to use indirect features (chunk staging) live from the diff - for most use cases it will infer obvious flags/parameters from where you're at. e.g: if you're on branch and start rebasing, it will soft-infer the source and target branch. another one, in the log view, selecting a few commits and diff will get you the diff for that range it basically reify the informations from the output transparently for you and reuse it where useful, saving you input and efforts multiple times per day - lastly very low complexity so it's quick and out of your way. every time I have to pair, my colleagues say they couldn't follow what I did because by the time I started talking about staging/pushing, I'm already finished and back to source

klodolph 1y ago
When I say “casual magit user”, I mean “magit user who is a casual user”, not “somebody who is a casual user of magit”. I just mean that I haven’t met people who use magit who don’t already know how to use git on the command line. The inference of flags and parameters is also helpful, yeah. I’m remembering times where I’ve done something in magit and it’s auto-populated some commit or branch name, and I’m like, “Yup, that’s the right one” which saves me fifteen seconds of looking up the right name. It makes sense that the command-line interface to Git would expect me to be more explicit.