Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree (Read 14869 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #15 –

Endish of the yearish sounds fine. Christmas is always a good time for presents. Throw a Santa in the linktree home for 1.1 beta. :D
Master of Expletives: Now with improved family f@&king friendliness! :D

Sources code: making easy front end changes difficult since 1873. :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #16 –

Humm ... maybe this wombat santa :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #17 –

I guess I can see the target audience for this software, but to be honest, this seems hugely bloated and time-wasting. What is wrong with the standard Git CLI aside from being a small learning curve at first?

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #18 –

I guess the usual problem with CLI: it looks complex. ;)
Bugs creator.
Features destroyer.
Template killer.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #19 –

I can't speak for everyone, but I think the solution to that is a tutorial, not a GUI.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #20 –

You really don't get it, do you? There are already plenty of pages on the web documenting use of the CLI for GitHub. Making a few more isn't going to change anything. Some people just don't want to use CLI. Why do you think GUI's of any type were invented? Do you think we should all still be operating our PC's via DOS?

SourceTree may be "bloated" if your primary concern is getting the job done with the minimum of code. A lot of people don't care about this, and why should they? It works. It runs just fine. The code behind it isn't a problem. It does the job.

I don't find it timewasting at all. I find it fast and convenient to use. Given the popularity of SourceTree, it's obvious I'm not the only person who feels like this. If you prefer CLI, go ahead and use CLI. Nobody who prefers SourceTree is going to care what you use. Suit yourself.
Master of Expletives: Now with improved family f@&king friendliness! :D

Sources code: making easy front end changes difficult since 1873. :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #21 –

GUIs were created for tasks where the required typed commands would be too much more effort than learning the layout of a GUI and which buttons perform the commands when clicked. For something as dead simple as Git, it's always faster and simpler to just type the commands out. I'm just saying that most people are going to find it much more beneficial to understand the Git CLI than having to install and then learn how the buttons translate to actions on a GUI.
Last Edit: September 14, 2015, 09:38:30 am by Ant59

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #22 –

Well I think you are making quite an assumption there. I don't need to know how the buttons translate to commands. I don't like typing commands. I prefer clicking buttons. I don't care how Git works as long as it works. How it works is not a topic that interests me. I can drive a car without doing a mechanic's apprenticeship for years. Some people just want to get to work and back.

But if you want to make tutorials, go ahead and make them. As I said, there are plenty around already. I can't see more of them making any difference, unless you think that all the previous ones were made by people who were too dumb to know what they were doing.
Master of Expletives: Now with improved family f@&king friendliness! :D

Sources code: making easy front end changes difficult since 1873. :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #23 –

Edited my post to reflect my meaning. The buttons and commands both translate to actions. The commands are easier to understand than buttons on a GUI. As I said above though, I can't speak for everyone and it's subjective. But in my opinion, it's easier to understand the outcomes from typing the commands than pressing buttons. And as you said, it's already very well documented.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #24 –

Commands are simple in that they "do what they say on the tin":

Code: [Select]
git branch
List, create or delete branches

Code: [Select]
git pull
Grab a remote

Code: [Select]
git push
Update a remote

Code: [Select]
git checkout
Checkout a branch

Code: [Select]
git commit
Commit changes

All these commands just do exactly as you type them. It's plain English, which I think is much easier than learning yet more software.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #25 –

QuoteThe commands are easier to understand than buttons on a GUI.
This is stated as fact rather than suggested as opinion. In that respect, it conflicts with your next sentence.

QuoteAs I said above though, I can't speak for everyone and it's subjective.
So you admit that commands may not be easier to understand than buttons? :D

The outcomes from pressing buttons are very easy to understand. You press a button. Something happens. You press it again, and the same thing happens again. It's really not terribly mysterious.
Master of Expletives: Now with improved family f@&king friendliness! :D

Sources code: making easy front end changes difficult since 1873. :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #26 –

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you're incorrect. Not everyone is going to see it the same way. I'm just saying that for me, and I think for most, it's easier to tell the machine what to do in English than learn yet more software with more interfaces and buttons and symbols, etc.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #27 –

Quote from: Antechinus – So you admit that commands may not be easier to understand than buttons? :D

Of course I admit that, why wouldn't I? Everyone's brain works in a different way. On a logical level though, commands make more sense.

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #28 –

Quote from: Ant59 – which I think is much easier than learning yet more software.
And I found learning the software was a piece of cake, and much more pleasant than frigging around with the CLI. :)
Master of Expletives: Now with improved family f@&king friendliness! :D

Sources code: making easy front end changes difficult since 1873. :P

Re: Do yourself a favour: point mugs at SourceTree

Reply #29 –

I think it all depends on what you need to achieve with git.  If you never intend to be more than a casual user the a simple GUI, with single install,  that gets the job done is great.  Perfect for those that want to supply a few lines of code here and there, every now and again.  The entire concept of git has been a real roadblock for some.

Now if you are going to do more complex operations then at some point the CLI is going to be the only solution.  But if you are not the repo owner and not worrying about merging in various feature branches or cherry picking fixes from some branch or the always joyful merge conflicts or whatever then the CLI is probably to much.  And if you don't use it a lot, you will forget the commands or the parameters.

I was going to give this tool a look, but I'm so dreadfully worried that adding in yet another git tool will mess up my environment, which is such a mess anyway.  I use a mixture of CLI (especially when I'm on *nix) or since git support is built in to my IDE, I use that quite often as well.