

GitHub for Windows 2.0 - bencevans
https://github.com/blog/1844-say-hello-to-github-for-windows-2-0

======
codemac
One of our hardware engineers uses Windows, and has been checking in
schematics and other documents into a git repo. He's tried switching to Linux,
but there are tools that only work on Windows.

I was pretty stunned to see just how Mac centric all attempts at making git
usable was these days. I use linux full time and just hadn't been paying
attention.

Thankfully github had this git for windows tool! Well, and then we had to
install a newer version of the .NET runtime so he could update to an even
newer vesion of the .NET runtime just to he could learn a UI that was pretty
foreign from the git tool that I was used to.

I'm pretty amazed that we never found a build of git that just _worked_ on
powershell or cmd.exe. I've been teaching him with the "gitshell" that github
has, but all the bashisms, the weird prompts..

Browsers have made cross platform tooling a ghetto. I'm not sure whether this
is good or bad, but it was certainly a recent relevation for me.

~~~
recursive
I've only ever used git from Windows. But I've used about four or five
different clients. I've been surprised how awkward they all seem. The
smoothest experience seems to be SourceTree from my experience. Most of them
don't approach the level of polish and smooth experience that TortoiseSVN
provided 10 years ago. I'm hoping this new client does better.

~~~
adamors
I have to agree that SourceTree provides the best Git experience on Windows
(I've used quite a few GUIs on Windows, including Github's offering). That
said, the weakest part is still the command line interface (but people on
Windows are already used to it, or don't know what they're missing).

------
GnarfGnarf
Shouldn't that be "GitHub 2.0 for Windows"?

~~~
tnorthcutt
Probably not, since the name of the application is "GitHub for Windows".

~~~
icefox
Except I like many others probably clicked on the link expecting to see a fun
little hack of someone that had a github app that ran on Windows 2.0 I was
curious how they got around the lack of built in networking.

------
jammycakes
The one thing I don't like about GitHub for Windows (and GitHub in general) is
its lack of a graphical view of your branches. I've found that a DAG view is
indispensible for understanding the mechanics of branching and merging, and
even now that I'm using the command line much more than I used to, I still
find I make extensive use of it.

I sometimes wonder if not displaying a DAG view is an attempt to make Git seem
more accessible to Subversion and TFS users, who are only used to a linear
concept of source history. (Microsoft's Git client in Visual Studio 2013 is
another one that does the same thing.) The problem is that it's misleading,
because it shows changesets as being related to each other when in actual fact
they aren't.

------
jrajav
Looks great! Though I don't have high expectations for any desktop Github
client to support the hundreds of features and workflows of Git, I mainly use
it as a souped-up `git status`.

I would prefer Github to bend a little more money and effort toward mobile.
The Github Android app is half-finished and doesn't have the one basic feature
that everyone wants from it - notifications.

It would also be nice for the mobile version of the Github site to have basic
feature parity with the desktop version. And it would be nice for Gist to have
a mobile version, period, or at least unbroken viewport scaling.

~~~
EddieRingle
I developed the first GitHub client on Android way back in 2009/2010 and
called it Hubroid. At one point it was much more complete than the current
official app, but the version currently in the Play Store is a rewrite that is
less feature-filled than the official client.

I've been planning to pick back work up on it again, especially if there was
interest in it.

------
leorocky
That's pretty nice. Personally I use Atlassian's SourceTree which provides a
nice shell in addition to their GUI and lets me do git the way I do on Mac and
Linux. It works with GitHub nicely.

~~~
dubcanada
Not to be nit-picky but it's Atlassians SourceTree.

~~~
manojlds
In this context (Github for Windows), it is BitBucket's SourceTree :)

~~~
jibsen
Except SourceTree works fine with both GitHub and BitBucket.

------
Joeboy
> Two years ago we launched GitHub for Windows as the > easiest way to use Git
> and GitHub on Windows.

Is this suitable for dealing with git repos in general, or just github ones?
I'd like to recommend my client a git thing they can use on Windows, but I'd
like it to not be tied to github.

~~~
DanitaBaires
Yes, it works with any git repo. I use it both with Github and Bitbucket.

------
Permit
Looks good and feels much more responsive.

One feature I'd like to see would be interacting with issues instead of having
to go to the website. Also, when writing a commit message, it'd be nice to
have autocomlete on issue numbers too.

------
romanovcode
Still no built-in diff tool and conflict merger?

------
cV6WB
Still unusable with very large repositories.

------
patrickread
Misleading title... Definitely read this as a version of GitHub software that
works on Windows 2.0 (as in
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.0](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.0)).

~~~
manojlds
What do you call version 2.0 of Github for Windows?

~~~
recursive
Github 2.0 for Windows

~~~
palakchokshi
Nope... that reads as version 2 of Github available on windows, which this is
clearly not. Github for Windows is the name of the product so its version 2.0
should be called Github for Windows 2.0

~~~
dragonwriter
I think the more fundamental issue is that, to avoid creating ambiguity,
software product names should not include, as their terminal component, the
name of another software product.

Not that there is much significant risk of more than momentary confusion with
Github for Windows 2.0 (but if it was Github for Windows 8.1, for instance,
that _would_ be a problem.)

