What does HackerNews think of GitUp?
The Git interface you've been missing all your life has finally arrived.
So, for instance, a GPL-licensed git client like GitUp[1] was fine to use, and didn't require clearance. You could totally also install a newer version of Nano if you wanted, too.
But, the rules _were_ somewhat vague and scary-sounding, so many engineers I worked with took the rules to mean "absolutely no GPL software under any circumstances".
What email is actually talking about is the option to bundle Nano _with the OS_, which Apple can't do with GPLv3 software. That's why for years, for example, macOS has had an absolutely ancient version of bash (before the license was updated to GPLv3), and switched to zsh in newer versions of the OS.
https://github.com/git-up/GitUp
> GitUp is built as a thin layer on top of a [Mac-only] reusable generic Git toolkit called "GitUpKit".
I think that's only because most of the UIs are so bad! Manipulating a graph is something that I think inherently is actually quite visual.
GitUp[0] has excellent graph-editing facilities, and has replaced almost all of my git command-line machinations.
Alas, it's semi-abandoned and left in a perpetual state of 90% doneness...
A little challenge, if you're interested: Give some git manipulations you would do on the command line, and I will show you how to do it more easily in GitUp, or concede defeat. :-)
- In-app git implementation for all operations; does not use the git command line at all
- Lightning fast* (*for reasonably sized repos; it's not yet optimized for super large repos)
- Simple yet powerful UI -- treats git as a graph and let's you operate on that graph.
- Commit graph visualization that's actually useful (IMO)
I used to use mostly the command line with fallback to magit in emacs; now I almost exclusively use GitUp.
Obviously I'm still in the honeymoon/fanboy phase, but I really feel like it deserves to be better-known. Check it out!