Re: EasyGit [Was: Re: my git problem]

["Sean Kelley" <sean.v.kelley@gmail.com>]

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:41 AM, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:
>>  Or maybe go Elijah's route and invent a new top-level command name in
>>  which issues like this can get fixed. (I've been lukewarm on the idea
>>  after watching the cogito attempt eventually be abandoned. I'd really
>>  much rather see Elijah's ideas get pushed down into git itself for the
>>  most part. But it's tough when backwards-compatibility prevents fixing
>>  some things that are obviously confusing people.)
>
> Except my route really doesn't fix things like this since I also
> pushed for backwards compatibility.  You'll note that Havoc used
> EasyGit and Git interchangably (both in his description and probably
> on his projects), since all I've really done so far in EasyGit is
> * provide built-in tutorial-oriented documentation
> * check for common user mistakes and warn about them
> * add subcommand options in a way that breaks up the near cylic
> knowledge dependence of git subcommands so that they can be learned in
> a layered/hierarchical fashion
> * add some gratuitous svn-compatibility commands to ease the
> transition for svn users
>
> I agree that it would be nice to get this stuff (other than the last
> point that likely doesn't make sense for git-core) into git
> itself...if the community wants it.

I agree with Carl in that my fear is that this will go the same route
as cogito if it doesn't get into git itself.  We use mercurial rather
extensively at garmin on my teams. There are a number of items I
really miss from git.  For the most part I believe Carl has enumerated
in other threads the sort of items that cause the greatest issues with
usability.

I think you addressed the first steps rather well with eg.

Sean