5 ms·

Gity (mac git gui)

15 points by tortilla 17y ago

tortilla 17y ago
Looks like Snow Leopard only.
- ComputerGuru 17y ago
  No excuse really not to be running it. That's actually something I really admire as a developer in the OS X platform: the users upgrade quickly making it easy to take advantage of new technologies.
  - ptomato 17y ago
    Unless you're on a PPC processor.
    - Zev 17y ago
      In that case, you're using a machine thats 4+ years old and its about time for an update. Especially if the machine is being used for development.
      - ptomato 17y ago
        Last PPC macs were G5 towers in August 2k6, which have plenty of power... And raw beefy system specs aren't really that much of a need for people doing e.g. Ruby coding because hey, Ruby is slow anyway. And the cross-section of people who use Git and people who code Ruby is quite large. http://github.com/languages http://github.com/languages
        Zev 17y ago
        Intel Mac's were announced in June 2005 ([1]). Apple started shipping them in the beginning of 2006. Anyone who bought a PPC Mac in August 2006 won't get any pity from me. And, where isn't it important to have a fast dev machine for, you know, actually getting work done and making sure the code works. The speed differences between a PPC mac and a current day Mac are huge. Yes, you can probably get by with a PPC mac if you don't actually execute any code on your machine. But, I would guess that thats very rare, if your job involves coding. [1] http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
        ptomato 17y ago
        Again, for anyone coding in a scripting language the speed difference isn't particularly significant and isn't enough to affect your workflow noticeably. What specifically doing Rails coding need a fast dev machine for?
        dasil003 17y ago
        Takes me 3 minutes to run our full test suite, takes some of my colleagues > 10 minutes. Importing a dump of our production DB takes me only 4 hours, takes them 10.
        dasil003 17y ago
        Ruby coding because hey, Ruby is slow anyway This logic is absolutely backwards.
  - pieter 17y ago
    GitX has a Snow Leopard userbase of 61%, so I'm not sure if it would be worthwile to make it Leopard-compatible. I don't think many users would upgrade to SL only for Gity, though some participants of the GitX user survey said they would if GitX were to require SL, so maybe I'm wrong.
  - rudd 17y ago
    Of course there are excuses. It's a big hassle to upgrade a computer. There's the time involved, so if you can't spare a block of a few hours to be dedicated to your computer while not being able to use it, then that's a big incentive not to upgrade. Also, there's the worrying that it can cause that if something goes wrong, you're going to either lose all your data or have to load it from a backup if you have one. For something that offers only some speed improvements and no big new features, I have very little reason to upgrade. I wonder what gity is using that makes it 10.6-only.
  - bestes 17y ago
    How about remote mounting a filesystem using sshfs. I have found this is a big problem on SL. The MacFUSE beta allows it to work at all, but performance can be terrible. I'm trying ExpandDrive now, but it's $49 and performance could still be better.
  - dasil003 17y ago
    I'm not on Snow Leopard because I don't have a whole day to waste rebuilding all my unix shit. Nothing wrong with Leopard. I'm going to wait til I get a new machine, then attempt to go the Homebrew path and build all my stuff in ~. That'll be worth the effort where upgrading today would definitely not be.
    - mhartl 17y ago
      Exactly. Experience has shown it's unwise to budget less than a full day for an OS upgrade. Multiply > $100/hr. times ~7-8 hours and you start to understand why I haven't yet upgraded. I'd appreciate if these Gity guys would explain why 10.5 wasn't good enough for them.
      - bl4th3sk1t3 17y ago
        Gity requires 10.6 because of new Snow Leopard only API's - Grand Central Dispatch and a few others.
        mhartl 17y ago
        Thanks! On rereading the comment, my tone sounds a bit flippant. Sorry about that.
pieter 17y ago
I guess some competition to GitX is good :). I'm almost finished with my study, I'll see if I can get some work done on GitX again while I'm looking for a job. The icon does look a bit familiar though.
- anotherpaulg 17y ago
  I haven't tried gity, so I can't comment either way. But I can recommend gitx, it's great.
  - rimantas 17y ago
    I just did try it. Gitx has nothing to fear for a while.
    - hypermatt 17y ago
      Thats sad ;( I never really liked GitX. I still have to use the commandline or shortcuts in textmate
colbyolson 17y ago
They call it Gity on the website, but the applications title is Gitty. The jQuery screenshot viewer is neat, but having to repoint to each << >> to scroll is annoying.
- jonknee 17y ago
  "The jQuery screenshot viewer is neat, but having to repoint to each << >> to scroll is annoying." Just use the arrow keys on your keyboard. Much easier :)
  - colbyolson 17y ago
    Ya know, as soon as I hit reply, I knew I should have tried the arrow keys. Thanks for the confirmation. :)
- Zev 17y ago
  Are you sure Gity is the same thing as Gitty? Gity (this app, by Aaron somthing) and Gitty (a different app, http://macsamurai.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-new-project-gitty.html http://macsamurai.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-new-project-gitty...., by Colin Wheeler) have similar names, but I don't believe they are the same applications.
  - colbyolson 17y ago
    Check it yourself. Click the title and visit the site. Click the picture to view screenshots and around two images in, you can see the title of the application is "Gitty."
    - Zev 17y ago
      The "Gitty" in the screenshots is the name of the folder the repo is stored in, not the name of the application. Confusing choice on the authors part? Yup. http://img.skitch.com/20091107-8pwm7hbtsrhc1gs2pn7kk4ba59.jpg http://img.skitch.com/20091107-8pwm7hbtsrhc1gs2pn7kk4ba59.jp... is a screenshot after I cloned a repo, for example.
jmatt 17y ago
I currently use git and the command prompt on my mac. I use the GitGUI on the PC (it kills me using cygwin... I fail and complying to the minor differences). I would be interested in a new GUI option for the mac, I just haven't found anything yet. (I know GitX, maybe I'll check it out again) I would definitely try this if it were out for 10.5. I'm using 10.5.8. Only because I'm waiting for more complete support from dev tools and dev projects that I use. If 95% of my dependencies and tools work, then I'd still have to find or replace 5%. I can't think of anything that 10.6 offers that is going to offset having to pull code straight from the repository, build, and potentially debug. 5 or 10 years ago, when I was younger, I would have switched immediately and taken on all that extra work. Not anymore. I still consider myself an early adopter. EDIT: Changed order of text
simanyay 17y ago
I don't understand how does it make you more productive vs using default shell-based tools. Those in the IDEs and text editors make somewhat sense but I don't see any advantages of separate, GUI applications.
- sanswork 17y ago
  I haven't tried this one but I use GitX mostly for when I'm doing code reviews or want to quickly scroll through a project history and check a random commit. The rest of the time it's the shell tools.

Gity (mac git gui)

15 points by tortilla 17y ago

tortilla 17y ago

Looks like Snow Leopard only.

ComputerGuru 17y ago
No excuse really not to be running it. That's actually something I really admire as a developer in the OS X platform: the users upgrade quickly making it easy to take advantage of new technologies.
- ptomato 17y ago
  Unless you're on a PPC processor.
  - Zev 17y ago
    In that case, you're using a machine thats 4+ years old and its about time for an update. Especially if the machine is being used for development.
    - ptomato 17y ago
      Last PPC macs were G5 towers in August 2k6, which have plenty of power... And raw beefy system specs aren't really that much of a need for people doing e.g. Ruby coding because hey, Ruby is slow anyway. And the cross-section of people who use Git and people who code Ruby is quite large. http://github.com/languages http://github.com/languages
      - Zev 17y ago
        Intel Mac's were announced in June 2005 ([1]). Apple started shipping them in the beginning of 2006. Anyone who bought a PPC Mac in August 2006 won't get any pity from me. And, where isn't it important to have a fast dev machine for, you know, actually getting work done and making sure the code works. The speed differences between a PPC mac and a current day Mac are huge. Yes, you can probably get by with a PPC mac if you don't actually execute any code on your machine. But, I would guess that thats very rare, if your job involves coding. [1] http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
        ptomato 17y ago
        Again, for anyone coding in a scripting language the speed difference isn't particularly significant and isn't enough to affect your workflow noticeably. What specifically doing Rails coding need a fast dev machine for?
        dasil003 17y ago
        Takes me 3 minutes to run our full test suite, takes some of my colleagues > 10 minutes. Importing a dump of our production DB takes me only 4 hours, takes them 10.
      - dasil003 17y ago
        Ruby coding because hey, Ruby is slow anyway This logic is absolutely backwards.
- pieter 17y ago
  GitX has a Snow Leopard userbase of 61%, so I'm not sure if it would be worthwile to make it Leopard-compatible. I don't think many users would upgrade to SL only for Gity, though some participants of the GitX user survey said they would if GitX were to require SL, so maybe I'm wrong.
- rudd 17y ago
  Of course there are excuses. It's a big hassle to upgrade a computer. There's the time involved, so if you can't spare a block of a few hours to be dedicated to your computer while not being able to use it, then that's a big incentive not to upgrade. Also, there's the worrying that it can cause that if something goes wrong, you're going to either lose all your data or have to load it from a backup if you have one. For something that offers only some speed improvements and no big new features, I have very little reason to upgrade. I wonder what gity is using that makes it 10.6-only.
- bestes 17y ago
  How about remote mounting a filesystem using sshfs. I have found this is a big problem on SL. The MacFUSE beta allows it to work at all, but performance can be terrible. I'm trying ExpandDrive now, but it's $49 and performance could still be better.
- dasil003 17y ago
  I'm not on Snow Leopard because I don't have a whole day to waste rebuilding all my unix shit. Nothing wrong with Leopard. I'm going to wait til I get a new machine, then attempt to go the Homebrew path and build all my stuff in ~. That'll be worth the effort where upgrading today would definitely not be.
  - mhartl 17y ago
    Exactly. Experience has shown it's unwise to budget less than a full day for an OS upgrade. Multiply > $100/hr. times ~7-8 hours and you start to understand why I haven't yet upgraded. I'd appreciate if these Gity guys would explain why 10.5 wasn't good enough for them.
    - bl4th3sk1t3 17y ago
      Gity requires 10.6 because of new Snow Leopard only API's - Grand Central Dispatch and a few others.
      - mhartl 17y ago
        Thanks! On rereading the comment, my tone sounds a bit flippant. Sorry about that.

pieter 17y ago

I guess some competition to GitX is good :). I'm almost finished with my study, I'll see if I can get some work done on GitX again while I'm looking for a job. The icon does look a bit familiar though.

anotherpaulg 17y ago
I haven't tried gity, so I can't comment either way. But I can recommend gitx, it's great.
- rimantas 17y ago
  I just did try it. Gitx has nothing to fear for a while.
  - hypermatt 17y ago
    Thats sad ;( I never really liked GitX. I still have to use the commandline or shortcuts in textmate

colbyolson 17y ago

They call it Gity on the website, but the applications title is Gitty. The jQuery screenshot viewer is neat, but having to repoint to each << >> to scroll is annoying.

jonknee 17y ago
"The jQuery screenshot viewer is neat, but having to repoint to each << >> to scroll is annoying." Just use the arrow keys on your keyboard. Much easier :)
- colbyolson 17y ago
  Ya know, as soon as I hit reply, I knew I should have tried the arrow keys. Thanks for the confirmation. :)
Zev 17y ago
Are you sure Gity is the same thing as Gitty? Gity (this app, by Aaron somthing) and Gitty (a different app, http://macsamurai.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-new-project-gitty.html http://macsamurai.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-new-project-gitty...., by Colin Wheeler) have similar names, but I don't believe they are the same applications.
- colbyolson 17y ago
  Check it yourself. Click the title and visit the site. Click the picture to view screenshots and around two images in, you can see the title of the application is "Gitty."
  - Zev 17y ago
    The "Gitty" in the screenshots is the name of the folder the repo is stored in, not the name of the application. Confusing choice on the authors part? Yup. http://img.skitch.com/20091107-8pwm7hbtsrhc1gs2pn7kk4ba59.jpg http://img.skitch.com/20091107-8pwm7hbtsrhc1gs2pn7kk4ba59.jp... is a screenshot after I cloned a repo, for example.

jmatt 17y ago

I currently use git and the command prompt on my mac. I use the GitGUI on the PC (it kills me using cygwin... I fail and complying to the minor differences). I would be interested in a new GUI option for the mac, I just haven't found anything yet. (I know GitX, maybe I'll check it out again) I would definitely try this if it were out for 10.5. I'm using 10.5.8. Only because I'm waiting for more complete support from dev tools and dev projects that I use. If 95% of my dependencies and tools work, then I'd still have to find or replace 5%. I can't think of anything that 10.6 offers that is going to offset having to pull code straight from the repository, build, and potentially debug. 5 or 10 years ago, when I was younger, I would have switched immediately and taken on all that extra work. Not anymore. I still consider myself an early adopter. EDIT: Changed order of text

simanyay 17y ago

I don't understand how does it make you more productive vs using default shell-based tools. Those in the IDEs and text editors make somewhat sense but I don't see any advantages of separate, GUI applications.

sanswork 17y ago
I haven't tried this one but I use GitX mostly for when I'm doing code reviews or want to quickly scroll through a project history and check a random commit. The rest of the time it's the shell tools.