
GitUp makes Git painless - mirceasoaica
http://gitup.co/
======
cheald
It's kind of amusing to me how the pendulum has swung, and we're now producing
OS X-only developer software.

But then, I'm an oddball who works on Windows as my shell with the real work
happening on a headless Linux box via SSH and Samba for 99% of my development.

~~~
Touche
There's no market for this sort of thing on Windows. The vast majority of
development that happens on Windows takes place in either Visual Studio or
Eclipse, and those developers prefer tools that integrate with their IDE
rather than be standalone.

~~~
stinos
Maybe I'm odd but apart from working in VS, none of your statements hold true
for me. I saw this and was like 'gimme gimme' only to find out it is OSX only.
Quite a disappointment, especially given the recent stall (afaik) in
SourceTree for Windows development, making me go back to the command line more
and more again. I vastly prefer standalone tools for things like git because
else I have to learn the builtin tools for each environment seperately. (I do
use Git Diff Margin for VS [1] though - in fact it's becoming more and more
indispensable to me which actually shows what a great tool it is)

[1]
[https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/cf49cf30-2ca6...](https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/cf49cf30-2ca6-4ea0-b7cc-6a8e0dadc1a8)

~~~
antihero
Why exactly do you stick with Windows? Hardware?

~~~
LocalPCGuy
Not the person you asked the question of, but I have a few reasons:

1) Hardware - cost is 1/2 Mac hardware, and I can upgrade cheaper as well. For
example, my ultralight notebook came with 4GB Ram and a 128GB SSD. For ~$1000
- Mac equivalent was ~$1400 at the time, with no option to match the screen
(1080p). Since then, I've upgraded but the SSD and Ram for another $300 -
would have cost almost $700 to do the equivalent upgrade on the Mac and it
would have been at the time of purchase.

2) I've grown up using Windows, CMD, batch files, etc. I know my way (a
little) around the registry, services, etc. I'd have to relearn all of that on
the Mac.

3) I hate all the program menus being at the top of the screen. I have a Mac
on my desk at work...and it just drives me nuts. I'm sure I'd adapt, but it
bugs me.

I could find more, but I've come to admit that I'm just a Windows user. If I
need Linux or something, I just install a VM and go to town.

~~~
antihero
1) Hardware ...

Fair enough, I get this, but I also found that if its your main professional
tool, a few hundred either way isn't that big an issue.

2) I've grown up using Windows

I actually found that learning OSX stuff is quite simple if you just see it as
a tool as opposed to a hobby.

3) I hate all the program menus being at the top of the screen.

Fair enough, guess that's personal preference.

Seems like you have fairly decent reasons for your choice, but I couldn't go
back.

------
dcre
I'm a SourceTree user on Mac. Just tried GitUp out for an hour.

Here are the problems I have with SourceTree:

* Slow as hell

* No/bad keyboard shorts, and setting up custom ones is annoying and buggy

* Uses tons of memory — it eventually gets up to 1 GB after running for a day or two, and my repos are not very big.

My thoughts on GitUp:

* Crazy fast (almost disarmingly so – I think it needs more visual confirmation when things happen)

* Excellent commit/staging view. Reminds me of GitExtensions, a nice Git GUI for Windows

* I love the focus on keyboard shortcuts. They work really well in the commit view

* Map view is truly awful. I get that it's a work in progress, but I have no idea what its organizing principle is. Too much pointless whitespace. It radically overprivileges old branches and commits. I don't see a way to focus on what I did most recently.

* The list of commits (Cmd+D) in the map view is useless

~~~
Danack
The slowness appears to be caused by continual directory scanning. For me at
least, turning off the "Refresh when files change" option, and so having to do
"view, refresh" or Command-R, made SourceTree be zippy again.

And as I'm usually on a laptop, having less continued CPU usage is a good
tradeoff against having to press refresh when I'm going to do something in
SourceTree.

~~~
Too
Does not work, i've also heard from other sources that turning this option
_on_ makes it faster because then it uses some native file-changed-hooks
instead of continuously polling the directory. For me both options are equally
slow and many forum posts say the same. Sourcetree performance simply is crap
and no fiddling with the options fixes this, nor should this fiddling be
required. You can find bug tickets about performance issues dating back years
but nothing happens, don't waste your time on sourcetree just because it looks
shiny, use a tool that actually works.

------
eric_h
> IMPORTANT: During Pre-Release, signing-up for a GitUp account allows you to
> enable advanced features (like rewriting commits), participate in the GitUp
> forums, access the "Continuous" build channel, and most importantly, show
> your support for the app and future developments!

Why do I need a GitUp account to enable rewriting commits?

Furthermore it looks like these prerelease builds expire. I'm guessing the
released software will be neither free nor open source.

~~~
swisspol
Anything can happen (I have a number of projects that are open-source, some
other close-source), but the idea so far is to have a free app with an in-app
purchase to unlock the advanced/pro feature.

I might make open-source some of the "Git toolkit" I built for this app, but
it's too early to say.

The reason for expiring builds is that 1) it's pre-release, 2) it's a software
intended for professional engineers and 3) the app is rapidly evolving, so I
don't want to have people using old versions which may have bugs fixed since
then: [http://forums.gitup.co/t/gitup-release-
notes/16](http://forums.gitup.co/t/gitup-release-notes/16).

~~~
baldfat
You don't need to make an application closed source to have in app purchases.

Look at mobaxterm
[[http://mobaxterm.mobatek.net/license.html](http://mobaxterm.mobatek.net/license.html)]
It is licensed under GPL version 3.

It has a free version and a professional version which cost $69 per user. This
does not break the GPL. You may already know this but it seems like a lot of
developers think open source mean Free as in cost.
[[http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html)]

This is also the reason why I don't like the term Free Software since people
usually think it is speaking about the cost.

~~~
cookiecaper
Although the GPL _allows_ authors to charge for software, it disposes of all
legal copyright protections that make such charges practical. Charging for GPL
software doesn't mean anyone will pay you, it just means that everyone will
get the free builds from someone else, which is even less desirable than
releasing free builds since you lose control of distribution. Look at Red Hat
and CentOS for case in point.

~~~
zapt02
Yeah, Red Hat is really bleeding money from the all the lost sales caused by
CentOS. I can't believe they only made a puny 1.53 billion dollar in revenue
last year.. </sarcasm>

[http://investors.redhat.com/financials-
statements.cfm](http://investors.redhat.com/financials-statements.cfm)

~~~
corysama
Please note that the HN community takes a rather strict approach when
moderating comments that contribute noise to the conversation. "Nice article!"
comments are routinely downvoted. As is sarcasm, witticisms, memes, references
and other styles of comments that occur frequently but do not contribute to
the discussion. It's a knowingly doomed attempt to hold back the flood of
noise that covers Reddit.

~~~
yellowapple
The parent comment, however, was actually relevant to the point being
discussed (whether or not the ability to fork a free-as-in-speech but not
free-as-in-beer program is a significant risk to one's business model).
Sarcasm or no, it's a valid point, and thus I feel trying to spout off
admonitions in the name of the "HN community" is inappropriate in this
context.

~~~
corysama
Yeah, this was iffy. I totally agree with the comment. But, when it comes to
maintaining a community, it doesn't matter if you are right if you are a jerk
about it.

For the discussion: I recently paid for the Synergy software KVM even though
it is GPL. Synergy's purchase process is very smooth. Paying $10 for the
installers was much easier than compiling it myself. And, I was already had
confidence that Synergy was useful, good quality, well-maintained software.
So, I was happy to support it as long as doing so was convenient.

------
dan00
I don't know if it's such a good idea to start by showing how easy changing
commit messages is or even have this option that easily available, because
after all you're changing the history and the beginner might not be aware what
this really means, and beginners seem to be the target audience for this tool.

~~~
graffitici
I agree. If you've already pushed to other repos with the old commit message,
this can cause issues. The only time I actually change the commit message is
when I'm sure that nobody else has seen it. I'm not even sure what happens
when you change the local commit message, and push it again. Does it just get
updated in the remote repo?

~~~
swisspol
You get the usual Git error "unable to fast-forward" which means in plain
English that what's on the remote repo doesn't match what you have locally
anymore, so you can't push, unless you force.

In such cases, GitUp just prompts you if you want to force push.

If you decide to force push, then your updated commit message is on the remote
repo as well. This is completely safe if this is your private repo, or you are
pushing to a private branch. In any other situation e.g. a shared repo with a
team or a public repo on GitHub, you should pretty much never force-push as
this will mess up other people clones (as there are now 2 histories of the
repo in a way).

~~~
loumf
Which makes it really weird that your video shows you doing this to master, a
branch very likely to be shared.

~~~
graffitici
I agree. Instead of promoting this as something very simple to do with GitUp,
we should stop people from having people the urge to change commit messages.

Plus, as even programming data structures are increasingly immutable, I don't
see why I would go change the commit message from a week ago.

------
okal
I realize this is a pretty broad question, but what is it about Git that
people find _painful_? Could be Stockholm Syndrome on my part, but I have a
pretty hard time understanding why someone can't spend a week getting up to
speed with a tool they intend to use for years to come.

~~~
swisspol
The fact 3 of the top 5 questions of _all time_ on Stack Overflow are for
basic Git operations tells you something:
[http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=votes](http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=votes).

IMO this all boils down to the Git CLI just being terrible e.g. “git add” to
stage versus “git reset HEAD” to unstage. Pretty much everything is like that.
And there are always edge cases so that a command works in this case but not
in that one. Want to edit a commit message? "git amend". But only if the last
one. Otherwise it's "git rebase -i" (even though your intent is not to do a
rebase, go figure). Well, not if it's a merge actually, you'd need "git rebase
-p" or something... Even if something is conceptually simple, Git CLI manages
to make it complicated. And GUI tools don't help much as they just wrap the
Git CLI.

Of course it does make sense if you know how Git is built internally, but
that's irrelevant to getting the job done :)

Anyway, with GitUp, the idea is to have an interactive live map instead, where
operations and UI actually make sense, while still being 100% compatible with
Git under the hood.

~~~
HashHishBang
Considering the top 5 questions of all time on SO for most technologies are
trivial/basic cases or homework. Yeah, when I first used Git I had to look
things up.

Now that I use Git daily a tool like this seems like a terrible plan. I don't
even trust basic scripts for git commands I haven't written/read totally,
something which I'm not prepared to do for this tool.

>Anyway, with GitUp, the idea is to have an interactive live map instead

I like the idea of a live map, but the "interactive" part seems silly.

~~~
swisspol
> Considering the top 5 questions of all time on SO for most technologies are
> trivial/basic cases or homework.

To a certain degree, yes, but we're talking here about the top 5 question
_across all technologies and tools_ used by developers on the _most popular
reference site_ and by far. And Git stands out by far, not anything else ;)

> Now that I use Git daily a tool like this seems like a terrible plan.

Trust is important indeed. In case this helps, GitUp comes with snapshots and
undo/redo and you'll always have the reflog as well. It's actually really
really hard to lose committed work in Git.

------
masnick
This looks great.

BTW I don't get all the negativity in the comments about Mac-only tools. A
huge number of developers use Macs specifically for well-designed third party
software with *nix goodness. I wish other platforms had the same quality of
third party software, but they just don't. This is mostly because it is much
more difficult to make money selling software for other platforms, for
whatever reason.

In any case, I don't see the justification for ragging on someone for
developing for (1) the platform they choose to use themselves and (2) the only
platform where indie devs can make any money.

------
zatkin
>[http://gitup.co/images/speed.png](http://gitup.co/images/speed.png)

I hope no-one here ever has to deal with a tree like this.

~~~
scotthew1
i'd expect any significant project to have a tree _at least_ that complex.
here's a small sample of my company's tree with several team repos merging
into a master repo. this tool really loses its usefulness quickly for repos
this complex..

[http://i.imgur.com/xl2a1ac.png](http://i.imgur.com/xl2a1ac.png)

~~~
zatkin
Are you on the art industry?

------
davexunit
Hmm that's not Magit...

OSX only and proprietary: no thanks.

~~~
Grue3
Was about to post the same thing. Magit made me so much better at using Git,
it's ridiculous.

~~~
davexunit
Hands-down the best Git interface, and entirely keyboard driven. It has
improved my workflow more than any other tool besides Emacs itself.

------
jv22222
The general verbiage, tone and saying things like "It will change your life as
a developer" makes me not really want to look into it.

Show, don't tell, that's my advice.

Anyway, the main point is you are making an effort to build something that can
solve problems and you are putting it out there, so well done on that front.

~~~
swisspol
"Show, don't tell": that's what the short movie (which is only a screencap,
not a marketing promo), and animated GIFs are for :)

~~~
jv22222
Right. So... SHOW and don't tell ;) -- ie Axe/change the heckle raising
verbiage.

Edit: If you make something great you don't need to brag, it's just great, and
people will get that.

Edit 2: Think of it like this. You're creating a conversion funnel. People are
landing on your page. If 50% of them instantly leave due to the bragging then
the conversion funnel is not very optimized. You want as many people as
possible to get into your funnel and few as possible to leave on any one step.

~~~
stcredzero
_If you make something great you don 't need to brag, it's just great, and
people will get that._

If the "brag" is factually correct and doesn't spin or otherwise misrepresent,
what's the problem? Some people might be repelled by "brags." Others might be
repelled by being overly concerned with someone else's style.

~~~
jv22222
\- "This will change your life as a developer"

\- "The Git interface you've been missing all your life has finally arrived."

How can those possibly be factually correct brags?

Edit: Looking in to swisspol's real world profile... I must admit he's
achieved so much that he probably does have the right to brag, so this may all
be a moot point anyway ;)

~~~
swisspol
Hey, it's called promotion and marketing, don't read _too_ much into it ;)

And it's not far at all from what a number of GitUp users are saying
themselves:
[https://twitter.com/GitUpApp/favorites](https://twitter.com/GitUpApp/favorites).

~~~
jv22222
Well, I just saw that profitseduction.com says it's exactly the right thing to
do (and that's a classy blog), so... I take it all back ;)

[http://profitseduction.com/are-you-afraid-to-make-a-bold-
cla...](http://profitseduction.com/are-you-afraid-to-make-a-bold-claim)

~~~
stcredzero
Thanks for trying to impress us with an appeal to authority.

------
barbs
Looks interesting. I think speed is absolutely important when it comes to
version-control interfaces. It was one of the main reasons Linus created it in
the first place (as opposed to SVN), and I'd argue it's important to maintain
flow.

My current git interface is "tig", a curses-based command-line client, which I
enjoy for its speed and simplicity. Gitup looks appealing for similar reasons.

------
paozac
The tree visualization is nice, but if you'd rather use a (Mac only) GPL tool
then Gitx-dev, a fork of Gitx, is still pretty good
([http://rowanj.github.io/gitx/](http://rowanj.github.io/gitx/)).

------
dcre
Does this mean they're using libgit2, or what?

> Because it bypasses the Git binary tool and interacts directly with the repo
> database, GitUp is vastly more reliable than other Git clients and often
> faster than the command line.

~~~
swisspol
GitUp uses a subset of libgit2 for the core low-level functions (credited in
the About panel and I've been contributing to it for some time).

Then on top of it is an extensive toolkit I built in a few months for repo
manipulation and rendering.

~~~
dcre
Thanks!

------
chjohasbrouck
There's something really satisfying about seeing a visual representation of my
git repositories, but my overall impression is that I'm not going to get any
productivity gains here.

If you know what you're doing, CLI is just faster. I understand that it's
aimed at more novice developers, but I think for those developers it's even
more important to use the command line. Developers that get into the habit of
using unnecessary graphical UIs always seem worse off because of it.

~~~
swisspol
> If you know what you're doing, CLI is just faster.

This is quite true with other Git GUIs since they pretty much wrap the Git CLI
and add a bunch of dialogs and whatnot, but GitUp was designed especially to
avoid that. I'm a big user of the CLI myself, so the last thing I wanted was
to build a Git client with a slower interaction model :)

Between the keyboard shortcuts and the fact it deals directly with the repo
database, GitUp _is_ actually faster than the CLI in a number of cases.
Experienced Git users do notice it on Twitter and on the GitUp forums. One
example from my workflow: just rebasing my work branch is instantaneous in
GitUp while the Git CLT takes a couple seconds (the UX being as fast in both
cases to perform the operation, so a net gain for sure).

YMMV of course and you can totally use GitUp for some operations and Git CLI
for some others.

~~~
wingerlang
> it deals directly with the repo database

Does this mean we have to rely on your code to be fully compatible with the
repo database? I mean git is obviously tested and true when it comes to
modifying the database, so I trust it.

Now I don't know anything about the formats used, so maybe it's not a big
issue. But for such a critical piece it's quite important.

------
mgold
It saves snapshots of you git history. So we have version control... for our
version control? Slick.

------
neil_s
I needed something like this when I was starting out, and still occasionally
do. Obviously once you've had a few dozen commits you get a hang of things,
but initially, the visualisation can help a lot.

For my co-founder who's just getting started with software engineering
practices like version control, I recommended she use ungit
([https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit](https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit))

------
zyxley
This had my attention right up until the "account needed for some features"
thing.

~~~
Animats
Right. "Some features require creating a free account." Then you wonder what
it's doing. "Sharing" your Git credentials with some cloud service?

After SourceForge turned evil, we have to be very suspicious of anyone trying
to cash in on open source development.

------
karmakaze
I've tried to use GitX and SourceTree in my workflow and always end up going
back to gitk. There's always some information, view or action I can do in gitk
that I can't make the others do. I find git from the command line to be the
most painless. Everything else is always the third thing after gitk and
command-line. Seeing multiple stashes used to be a great extra feature, then I
just stopped using stashes.

------
dallanlee
I think your choice, swisspol, to use the 'free-with-in-app-purchase' model is
the right one. You're selling to OS X users, who are willing to actually spend
money on apps and software, and it allows us to use an app and then decide if
we want to buy it. All that really needs to be said is, "GitUp is free with
lots of capability to get things done. But to speed up your workflow even more
and use all of its features, it offers an in-app purchase to upgrade." Plus,
we as OS X users are used to noticing that little 'in-app purchases' note on
apps and don't think it's a "slap in the face". I just hope that it will be
available on the Mac App Store. I trust apps most that are sold on the App
Store and I always look there first. I tie my card to my iTunes account or
even have gift card money ready to make a purchase. Also, I can see when it
was updated, what others say about it in reviews and share it quickly and
easily. Just my thoughts, @swisspol

------
kazinator
Dialog box? Why not drag and drop? Just drag this branch into the branch, to
indicate what shape of graph you want, and it merges to make it that way.

How about an interface where you can pick commits from a graph, and drag them
into a free space, where they exist as labeled points. Then, draw line
segments among hem and connect them to a graph. Then, the software cherry
picks these commits according to what you've drawn and creates that branch.
The need for a merge could be indicated as a red blinking light on a node.
(And the not yet cherry-picked segments are grayed out.) From there you click
on it, get a list of conflicted paths, and engage in resolution UI. The
blinking indicator goes away, and the cherry pick continues.

~~~
swisspol
GitUp Map is mostly keyboard driven at this time for speed, but post 1.0 the
idea is to add support for more mouse based UI indeed.

------
kolev
I love it! How can I pay for it? You should've kickstarted this!

~~~
swisspol
You can't yet, but thanks! :)

------
Raphmedia
Sounds very nice. I'm using SourceTree and it slows down my entire system
because I have up to 50 active repo I use which are updated often. Even when I
turn off automatic fetch.

------
bcg1
Proprietary development tools are a trap. And this software is just a
proprietary wrapper around a real community product. Doesn't matter if you
rewrote the library for interacting with the database... standing on the
shoulders of giants.

Are we really at the point where "professional engineers" need to buy a GUI as
a substitute for a fast, extensible, cross-platform command line tool that is
so easy to use that even I could figure it out?

~~~
FooBarWidget
So you say, but if that's what everyone thought then GPL would have won
instead of MIT. In every thread, the amount of "GPL is viral" people far
outnumber the GPL defenders. It's clear that most people prefer to be able to
build proprietary tools on top of open source ones.

~~~
bcg1
So you say, but popularity "in every thread" (whatever that means) is a silly
metric. Also I'm not sure what you mean by "then GPL would have won instead of
MIT". Its not a war, even if some trendy corporate wannabe hacker tries to
convince you that it is so that you give him the fruits of your labor for
nothing. And if it was a war... show me the MIT licensed toolchain, the MIT
licensed OS, etc. I'm not hating on permissively licensed free software at
all, I appreciate those who write it and give it to the world... but I'm going
to call you out if you try to sow the seeds of division among hackers.

------
Sbn
Windows + Linux is still ~80% of the developer share according to
Stackoverflow surveys, so this might not be the best direction to spend effort

~~~
dallanlee
That may be true, however OS X users actually spend money on apps.

------
erikb
Huge disadvantage that it's only for OSX. I don't know but I think the most
people who can't already handle git should be on Windows, right? Or on the
web. That's an attempt to be the best tool ever for people who don't know git
yet and it's not aiming at them. That's really a pity, because I hope it would
succeed.

------
hobarrera
`man git` make git painless. And it works on almost any platform.

I've also got to say I dislike how this makes history rewriting so simple,
advertises it so much, but shows no warning as to the complications this can
bring (anybody else using this repo will suffer greatly on the next pull!).

Of course, that's explains in the man page.

------
aagha
Awesome. Now 13% of people that would like to use it can [0]. Cool idea. Just
wish it wasn't tied to Mac.

0 -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_system...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems)

~~~
dikaiosune
[http://stackoverflow.com/research/developer-
survey-2015](http://stackoverflow.com/research/developer-survey-2015)

If StackOverflow surveys are any indication, more like 21.5%. I completely
agree that I wish it wasn't tied to Mac (Linux please and thank you), but the
proportion of developers is higher on OS X than in the consumer market. I have
no data to support this, but I suspect that many of those devs on Mac are also
front-end, which (again, no data) makes me think that they might care a lot
more about a nice GUI tool than devs on other OSes.

~~~
Alupis
It's interesting to note that according to the same data points, Linux Desktop
usage for developers is just about on par with OSX usage (20.5%).

------
brobdingnagian
I like the name GitUp for two reasons. First, it has the meaning "get up," and
second, if you say "GitUp" out loud, people would reasonably hear "GitHub,"
then you'd have to launch into an explanation of the differences between the
two.

~~~
wojciechpolak
There is already a git-up (which I really recommend btw):
[https://github.com/aanand/git-up](https://github.com/aanand/git-up) (Ruby)
and [https://github.com/msiemens/PyGitUp](https://github.com/msiemens/PyGitUp)
(Python) So why not do a quick research and choose a completely different name
for it?

------
copsarebastards
To be honest, git is already relatively painless. What problems does this
solve?

------
pdmy
Title is misleading. Should be makes Git painless for those who don't want to
learn a new tool (yeah even developers).

I have been using Git cmd line and its easy to use and would not have it any
other way.

------
lectrick
The entire philosophy of this goes against Git.

Editing history (including comments) without a new commit is basically a
revert to mutable history, which means shared git history suddenly becomes a
problem.

------
hwstar
Just couldn't resist... I've fallen and I can't GitUp

------
gre
When trying to fetch, I get: "Unsupported url protocol."

~~~
swisspol
HTTP/HTTPS, Git and SSH are supported. What's your remote URL?

It'd be very helpful if you could take a minute to post a topic at
[http://forums.gitup.co](http://forums.gitup.co) so I can have a look. Thanks!

~~~
gre
It was a syntax error in my ``.git/config``.

Here you go: [http://forums.gitup.co/t/improved-error-message-idea-if-a-
fe...](http://forums.gitup.co/t/improved-error-message-idea-if-a-fetch-fails-
show-which-remote-is-breaking-things/136)

------
quadrangle
Git is a registered trademark, I don't see notice of permission… maybe they
didn't ask and might not have it?

~~~
nkohari
IANAL, but they almost certainly don't need permission. Typically you just
need a message that says _X is a registered trademark of Y. GitUp is
unaffiliated with Y_.

Also, it's entertaining to me that in one comment you say that closed-source
proprietary software is bad, and in another comment you're concerned about
whether they follow trademark law. I understand that it's not a direct
comparison and open source software is still subject to IP law; it's just that
the juxtaposition of your comments is a bit silly.

~~~
quadrangle
Talking about "IP" law as one thing is useless. There's _certainly_ no real-
world validity to the idea that ideas are property, but even if we accept the
legal concept of it…

Copyright is a restriction that mostly censors the sharing and building of
ideas freely. It should be abolished. But it's currently used to deal with
plagiarism and to support copyleft licenses. We should have stronger legal
protects for attribution, against false endorsement claims, and support
technology freedom with mandates for source release for _published_ works and
prohibition of DRM.

Patents are just bullshit. We should abolish patent law and just have better
social systems for grants and funding for research (although it might already
be true that almost all useful patentable inventions are built on socially-
funded research already).

Trademark is a _consumer protection_. It is _absolutely_ essential. It
protects people in the market to know that they are dealing with the same
legitimate entity when they see the trademark in use. There are cases of abuse
or of it being overly strong, but trademark is totally important and basically
positive.

------
kainsavage
That moment when your tool gets posted to Hacker News and the video on your
homepage is muted and cannot be unmuted.

~~~
swisspol
It actually doesn't have a soundtrack at all :)

Mostly because I didn't have time for one and also because I wanted not to
require people to listen to some speech to understand how GitUp works (which
you can't always do at work anyway).

------
shroukkhan
only thing i can think is why is this not a webapp usable with any git
server..like github?someone should get to it !!

------
tb303
Git makes git painless

------
ExpiredLink
SVN makes version control painless.

------
the_ancient
>>Requires Mac OS X 10.8 or later

Apparently it is not the interface I have been missing...

Having a Git tool not available for Linux is blasphemy

~~~
zamalek
Yeah, I simply don't understand this recent tendency to launch on Mac first.
Out of the big 3 (Linux, Windows, Mac), Mac is by far the worst platform to
launch on because you have to buy hardware. Please can we stop it now. Just
launch on Linux - everyone can access Linux no matter whether they are PC or
Mac.

~~~
jakobegger
The Mac is a phenomenal platform to launch right now if you make software
targeted at developers. There's huge growth in mobile development, and many
mobile developers work on OS X. Not just iOS developers, I'm seeing lots of
Android devlopers working on Macs too recently.

And if you make a new tool, you should go where the young (in the sense of
experience, not age) developers are. Experienced developers already have their
workflows all set up and don't try new tools as often.

Even if its inconvenient for those who don't have a Mac, from a business point
of view, targeting the Mac is absolutely sensible.

~~~
hatsix
Having just (involuntarily) switched to a Mac at work, I can also attest to
the fact that Mac users tend towards impulse buying software... The fact that
I have to buy software to get proper window management and a good window
switcher makes me furious. App-only switching makes no sense to me. I just
want to pull up the last window I was looking at, I don't want to have to
think about whether it was in the current app group or not. Also, not allowing
that to be customized makes no sense. The OS has all of the info needed, and
the market for 3rd party apps shows there is a desire... but I guess I'm just
'holding it wrong'.

Most people in the office have spent $100 on software that just customizes the
OS, not even considering the other dev tools that they purchase.

As much as I detest OS X, IF I were releasing desktop software for-pay, I
would focus on OS X ($ per user) and Windows (kids & college students).

~~~
EC1
>Most people in the office have spent $100 on software that just customizes
the OS, not even considering the other dev tools that they purchase.

What's your point? Most people have spent >$100 on going to a theater to watch
movies, which is arguably a much worse way to spend money than improve your
workflow.

Windows has much worse window management than OS X, and so does Linux. Just
because the info is there, doesn't mean the Apple team should handle ever edge
case and scenario ever.. that's why you have applications. Should an OS also
come with a perfect and free IDE?

~~~
cheald
I'm trying to figure out what on earth you mean by OS X having better window
management than Windows and Linux. Of the three, I've long considered OS X to
have the worst.

~~~
EC1
Good for you.

------
v-yadli
No commit logs in the graph? I would prefer a list view instead...

~~~
swisspol
Try Cmd-D to see a list of ancestor commits with summary, date & author while
in the Map view.

~~~
v-yadli
I don't have a Mac at hand and the best effort I can do is to finish the 90
seconds. I would suggest an attempt to include more info in the stock view...
Even the metro map have station names. :-) People do not recognize commits
with just graphical patterns(especially when the patterns are just pulled in
from remote).

------
tomc1985
There's already an addon for git that makes git very painless:

git up [https://github.com/aanand/git-up](https://github.com/aanand/git-up)

Pick another name!

