
SourceTree now has 650,000+ MAUs - gitdude
https://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2015/02/25/were-just-getting-started-with-sourcetree/
======
flurdy
I do find SourceTree to be an important part of my toolset. For minor commits
and status I use the command line, but whenever I need to work on something
important on a large project I like the overview a GUI can give. Especially
when I decide to juggle razor blades with interactive rebases and cherry
picks. Though I still have to dive into the reflog occasionally... :)

And stree makes it so easy. The easy hunk inclusion is excellent etc. Whenever
I spot a dodgy commit by someone they usually have done it via command line
and not checked properly what they are including in the commit.

I just wished they would make a linux client for the 50% Im on my linux box. I
tried a lot of alternatives: Tower, GitG, SmartGit, etc. Whilst admirable they
are either too basic, not polished enough or lack some basic feature I depend
on. Hopefully they will get better or Atlassian releases a Linux client.

~~~
ewasylishen
I've found the gui tools that come with git are actually the closest thing to
SourceTree, and I'm tempted to switch to them because they're open source and
work everywhere:

git gui (for staging and committing, including selecting lines to stage, which
is in the right-click menu) gitk --all (commit graph of all branches,
switching checked out branch)

The main negative is a weird gui toolkit and some weird gui conventions (e.g.,
in "git gui", you click the _icon_ in the list of files on the left to
stage/unstage the whole file)

~~~
lttlrck
agreed, git gui and gitk are a really good combo. For the most part I use the
command line and sublimegit. git gui is hard to beat when I am staging hunks.

------
mcmillion
SourceTree went downhill after the last major UI overhaul and never really
recovered. I used to love it for more involved commits (picking apart lines
and hunks, etc), but now it's slow and clunky, even on nice hardware.

~~~
Gmo
Fully agree, they made a lot of nonsense changes, and from what I heard, it
was the same on Mac (I'm on Windows).

Unfortunately, I don't really find a good GUI alternative that I like either
...

~~~
ejdyksen
Git Tower is by far the best GUI I've used for git. It's not cheap ($59), but
absolutely worth it, IMO.

It's fast, it's regularly updated and supported, and it's powerful enough to
do complex stuff (rebases, merges, cherry-picks, etc).

[http://www.git-tower.com/](http://www.git-tower.com/)

~~~
Gmo
That's a mac app though, and I'm working on Windows :)

------
cstuder
I feel like SourceTree actually only maps every Git command with a button,
nothing more.

Contrast this with Github for Windows/Github for Mac. These applications are
trying to make getting startet with Git easy. If you're using Git with a GUI,
that's the way to go, not with a toolbar full of obscure buttons.

~~~
bdcravens
Anyone more than the simplest app with only one developer will quickly require
more than what the GitHub app provides. Whatever issues you run into, when you
Google and you haven't learned git, you'll have no clue. I like the mapping of
git commands: I can use the CLI, but I have a tool that makes that workflow
faster, rather than hide it from me because it's too hard.

However, for a tool that lets you quickly commit and push, which is what the
Github app is ideal for, Gitbox is very nice (Mac only however).

~~~
Schlaefer
SourceTree is that app: you know how git works but you don't want to fiddle
with CLI commands and text output limitations. 99,5% of the everyday workflow
is covered by a nice GUI.

Alas atlassian decided to go after the "Github App - no clue of git"
population by "simplifying" the UI in 1.9. It's my impression that that move
backfired hard in the existing SourceTree user-base.

~~~
bdcravens
To be fair, I haven't used 1.9. These days I'm mostly in Tower, which felt
like SourceTree with some added features (the way it does stashing is pretty
nice)

------
coreymgilmore
I find Sourcetree to be a pretty great product, with some negative marks here
and there. I use it on W7 and OSX and find the "tabbed" interface of Windows
versus the separate windows of OSX much easier to work with, especially on
large products.

Some issues I have: \- The app does have some lag at times. I really wish the
app would update with local changes and remote changes much faster. Commits
can also take some time. \- I know how to use the application, but it could
really use some better explanation/help around some features. For example, how
to set up SSH keys and how branch/merge/stash/tag work. This would make
Sourcetree much easier to learn for new users.

------
rikkus
I'm finding I work well with TortoiseHG. I've tried SourceTree but haven't
seen any advantage to it. Is there something special which might make it worth
learning?

------
drewmate
I don't have much experience with SourceTree, but I've found SmartGit/Hg to be
a great UI for dealing with git repos. It handles my ssh keys (and even
windows auth for TFS) like a champ, and has a really great view for looking at
the logs of different branches and merging.

For someone who spends some time every day in git, the license was well worth
it.

------
simplestyle
How does SourceTree compare to gitx? I've still to find a suitable alternative
to gitx, which is light-weight, lets me visualize branches, and stage hunks.
That's really all I need in a git gui.

------
jtwebman
It is crazy they still don't have a Linux version!

