I personally never use GUI clients for git, the CLI does exactly what it's supposed to do, efficiently, quickly in a stable reproducible manner, most GUI clients are for people who just don't want to learn to use the CLI properly.
But some tips for your project:
1-Lose the forced email registration
2-Easy on the Luxury, we're devs not divas
3-The beta agreement is just way too scary to take the product seriously, examples:
>Company grants Recipient a nonexclusive, nontransferable license to use the GitKraken (“Product”) for a period designated by the Company for the purpose of testing and evaluating the Product.
>This Product is a beta release offering and is not at the level of performance of a commercially available product offering. The Product may not operate correctly and may be substantially modified prior to first commercial release, or at Company’s option may not be released commercially in the future.
How do you expect to compete with other existing and stable products ? I'm not trying to sound harsh, this is just my views and I think I've got a point right?
"most GUI clients are for people who just don't want to learn to use the CLI properly"
Ridiculously arrogant comment with nothing to back it up. GUIs exist; get over it.
"How do you expect to compete with other existing and stable products?"
It's a beta. The T's & C's pretty much translate as "it's a beta". What do you want them to do, NOT release a beta? Fair enough if so, but a lot of software is released this way. And pretty much all FLOSS software excuses itself from any kind of warranty too.
I use both with git, nothing wrong with that. A GUI client for committing which allows me to better look at diffs and makes selecting files for staging easier, not having to do `git status` all the time; and the command line for everything else - pulls, merges, rebases, cherry picking etc etc.
PyCharm / any IntelliJ-based IDE, Atom, vim, emacs etc can also all nicely show git status of your current project. I'd suggest one of those as well in whatever flavor of editor you prefer.
I'm using mostly IntelliJ / PyCharm and Atom which indeed show me that status. I usually commit either with IntelliJ directly (though sometimes it's too inclusive which is annoying), or with gitg.
>Ridiculously arrogant comment with nothing to back it up. GUIs exist; get over it.
A simple google search for "How to use git without command line" will show you the amount of people who are looking for just that, I said most, not all, I believe git is a developer tool that's mostly used by dev who can navigate their way around CLI, lately i've seen and worked with non devs who want to just use GUI tools to help them around without having to know the details of what's going under the hood, this submission is a good example of that, it lacks every single tool that a developer that works in a big team with a big codebase needs. so yes, it's a tool for people who don't want to use the CLI properly. nothing arrogant at all.
>It's a beta. The T's & C's pretty much translate as "it's a beta". What do you want them to do, NOT release a beta? Fair enough if so, but a lot of software is released this way. And pretty much all FLOSS software excuses itself from any kind of warranty too.
This doesn't seem to be exactly a FLOSS per say, but I get your point, they're just doing it the wrong way, if you're gonna start something that you want to be on par with other tools, at least get out your beta with the same features, then add up on that post beta, but they're not doing that, they're releasing a GUI tool that has the basics of git, with videos and js animations. and if i'm going to even consider using that in a production environment I'd rather have a more serious T&C that will make me feel a bit safe that this thing will be supported and will live on for a few years ahead and not die, "It's just a beta" is something i'm really tired of hearing as an excuse to a crippled product, gmail was in beta for way to long and it was superior to all existing email solutions at the time, no one would've used it if it only supported sending and receiving emails, I wouldn't call his git client a beta either, it's more of an alpha experimental product IMHO.
Whenever you make an action using a GUI, you can clearly see what options are available to you, even if you're not using them. It's unreasonable for every person to invest the time to fully internalize the capabilities of every tool they use. The more (good) GUIs available, the better.
Why is this on the top of HN ?
Honestly, this is a bad thing, not a thing to show off.
To quote the author: "We're web developers, not iOS developers."
EXACTLY, don't bring your web tech into native platforms, learn to do it the
right way or just hire someone who knows how to do it.
Seeing things like that creeping into becoming a norm makes me cringe
This is on the top of HN because people, like me, are interested in it. You say learn to do it the "right way", by that logic we should have stuck to making desktop only apps instead of browser based web apps. I'm not saying this is better or worse. But I certainly think it's an approach worth considering.
It's a great piece of tech, I'm not saying anything against that, I'm saying that it shouldn't be used as a replacement for native programming because you don't want to learn a new language. react will come with huge limitations and deps that you don't want to even think about, it's never easy as "code once, deploy everywhere", this is usually a bad decision any company makes, engineering wise.. same reason as adobe air never took off, it's a bad idea, the only reason this is taking off is because people already know JS and don't want to learn something else.
By the "right way" I mean use every language for its intended purpose, you can't build desktop apps in browsers, that's why we have Javascript. and i'm saying we should keep it that way
React Native doesn't claim "code once, deploy everywhere", and in fact embraces native APIs where appropriate. As a reference, their slogan is "learn once, write anywhere". In other words, learn React Native, and write native apps wherever you want. Indeed one of the opening talks about React Native at React Conf specifically mentions that React Native is a leaky abstraction, and embraces that by allowing multiple escape hatches so that the native APIs are always available.
Railing against React Native seems like railing against Unity3d, or saying that abstracting the common parts of mobile development (while leaving the non-common parts 100% available) is a bad thing.
By the "right way" I mean use every language for its intended purpose, you can't build desktop apps in browsers
You can build desktop apps in browsers (ie emscripten). Additionally, can you explain why a "language" (as compared to platform specific APIs) has any relevance to what can or can't be built for a mobile device? For JavaScript specifically, if Apple didn't think that it was a language for building applications on iOS, then why would they ever have release JavascriptCore (which is what React Native uses)?
React is native.
It's a JS interpreter on a separate queue rendering native UILabels and UIViews.
I'd say the concept is far more superior to UIKit which disgusts me, and I've worked with for almost seven years now. I honestly think React is the future, but for now we can try to stick with MVVM and RxSwift ;-).
I think you're fundamentally not understanding how React (not just React-native) works.
This is mainly taking off because native developers want a fast build-run loop, hot code reloading, the ability to update code on the device without pushing a new App Store release, and a shared technology and mental model for writing apps across web, iOS and Android.
No, it is not. "I don't know what I am doing" mentality already hurts the web, where hordes of developers without understanding of the strengths and limitations of the platform are making angular monstrosities, now the same is being pushed to mobile.
Luckily it does not have much chances there.
It is on the top of HN because people find it interesting.
People are interested in bringing different tech into native platforms to decrease how much it will cost them to develop the product and I for one don't really care if it is not how you are supposed to do "proper development". Once upon a time you weren't supposed to build servers out of commodity components, but it worked alright for google.
I'm never satisfied with my multi computer setup / multi screen setup, i always ending with not knowing which one to use for what, or if i even need more than one, also i can never find that perfect keyboard...
unfortunately it doesn't work 100% under mac :(, right now i use moom !
but my problem was about the screens themselves, not how to tile windows in them, but what way to actually setup screens to make best use of them
That's true, I loved someone who i thought was out of my league, and ended up with her being the one thinking i'm out of her league ! of course we broke up within a year, but hey at least it happened !
Jim: Yo bob!, how's it going man?
Bob: Not so much, what's going on your side?
Jim: Nah, not so much, how's your family?
Bob: They're fine, how's your wife?
Jim: All is good man, all is good...
Bob: ....
Jim:.....
Bob: Hey we should make a webapp together!
Jim: That would be totally rad !..
Jim: .. I've even heard there's a sophisticated webapp framework for people having a smalltalk like us!
Bob: Whoa that's cool !, let's get on it man!
Jim: Smashing!!, But what kind of app should we work on?!
Bob: I don't know let's just download it and make something simple
Jim: Darn, it's only made for sophisticated webapps, says so on their website:(
Bob: Naaah, life sucks man, lets wait till they support simple stuff in the future
Jim: Sure thing, let's take it in our next smalltalk, gotta run now I have a scrum!
Bob: Ok, I'll get my coffee and leave before no one notices I don't even work here!
Jim: K man, cya!