
Legit: Git Workflow for Humans - DanielRibeiro
http://www.git-legit.org/
======
tudorizer
I kinda conceptually disagree with approaches like this, for the same reason I
dislike the official Github client: it renames some basic git concepts. e.g.
git sync. How is this helpful when the dev is put in front of a situation (not
configured server, new colleague who is not aware of legit)? Essentially I
admire the work put into this project, I just question the goal.

~~~
regularfry
It's just a shortcut. The underlying operations haven't gone away.
Abstractions are good.

~~~
zephod
In the general case, I agree. But working with Git you will very probably have
to learn what's going on beneath the abstraction sooner-or-later (ie. when I'm
working on a team larger than 1 person and the repo becomes a mess). So
writing abstraction layers just increases the number of things that need to be
learned.

~~~
tudorizer
My point exactly.

------
risratorn
Not really a new idea ... but to be honest, the naming of some of the commands
are equally vague to new users as the default git commands. Harvest, sprout,
graft?

I really think git could use a simpler and more understandable api for the
entry level commands pull/checkout/rebase/... but this isn't really helping
alot except for perhaps the switch and (un)publish commands.

~~~
aidenn0
The nice thing about those is that they create new terms rather than using
terms that exist in other VCSes but mean something very different.

------
CGamesPlay
Looks nice. The two biggest problems I have based off the README, in order:

1\. Only 1 git remote? I need at least `master` and `heroku` for all of my
projects, and often I'll need one or two extra `github` remotes for other
forks/collaborators.

2\. I wish it had pictures of what exactly it was doing (git graph-style
stacks of commits before/after each commit).

~~~
johnbellone
I completely agree with your first point, but I do think that the majority of
people using git probably don't have more than a single remote. I am sure
there are those few people that are tasked with pulling (and hopefully,
pushing) to the upstream, and likely a deployment remote like Heroku probably
exists behind some process or script.

~~~
moe
_I do think that the majority of people using git probably don't have more
than a single remote_

Strong disagree. Nowadays the majority of git-users probably interacts with
github. Just count the number of "Fork me on github"-ribbons that you come
across on any given day.

The github workflow for forking a repository[1] involves two remotes (origin
and upstream).

[1] <https://help.github.com/articles/fork-a-repo>

------
huragok
When I first encountered git, I had a hell of a time learning how to actually
control my source. Legit would've been a great gateway drug.

------
kristofferR
My thinking about this may be seriously flawed in some way, but couldn't the
official Git implement these command names or something similar as an
alternative to the currently supported commands without any problems?

Heck, why not even label the current Git commands as "legacy commands" and
leave them supported "forever", but officially change to more user friendly
and logical command names such as this?

~~~
icebraining
[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-
control.git/3145...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-
control.git/31455)

[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-
control.git/3147...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-
control.git/31475)

------
stevekinney
Looking over the commands, I thought, "Wow, this is really useful." Then the
creeping dread hit. It's the kind of dread that comes along with having worked
with computers for a long enough period of time: What happens when the project
is eventually neglected and I am left high and dry scrambling to unlearn all
of the neat shortcuts that I've come to rely on?

Then, I'll have to relearn all of the traditional methods that aren't going
anywhere. Normally, I'm not a uptight about this stuff, but it's the same
reason that I can't bring myself to switch from JavaScript to CoffeeScript
despite the fact that I _really_ like the syntax.

It's probably TextMate's fault as well as Apple's—the latter of which seems to
get a perverse kick out of jettisoning things people rely on—but, I am
increasingly leery of anything that has even the most remote chance of leaving
me high and dry.

~~~
rys
In these cases doesn't the value in "Wow, this is really useful." completely
outweigh the cost of having to learn something else if it does go away? It's
not like you have a finite set of things you can learn and then that's it,
brain's full.

Just use it until it stops being awesome and then use something else. Life's
too short and your time is too valuable to pass over things like this, where
your gut feeling is probably correct.

------
ratsz
Too legit to git!

------
debacle
I really like this. I have trouble with git - it is not my first VCS, and many
of the command aliases that it uses are not intuitive or do something very
different from what they do in other VCSes.

------
xmpir
i don't think anyone who used git daily for a month has problems with the
original command names. i used git before svn and now i'm totally unhappy with
the svn-command-names...

~~~
debacle
I've used git for almost a year and it's still furiously unfun to interact
with. It's not easy, it's not transparent, and it's not intuitive. You need to
really, deeply understand git in order to use it. I don't want to really,
deeply understand git any more than I really, deeply want to understand rsync.
It's a tool. I just want to use it.

~~~
aidenn0
It took me a day to get to the point where I understood the internals of git
well enough to be comfortable using it.

~~~
jabits
Well then you are just awesome. For anyone who has been using various source-
control systems for many years, its commands are not intuitive, and cause
unnecessary friction. Unfortunately, as elsewhere in life, the best tech does
not always win, at least in the short-term.

------
julian37
Previous discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3752447>

