From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Stefan Haller <lists@haller-berlin.de>,
"D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
"schacon@gmail.com" <schacon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Can we do better than "git checkout/add -p"
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 07:06:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anqt4a7L49W3BmZQ@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqldae6luz.fsf@gitster.g>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 08:23:00AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Haller <lists@haller-berlin.de> writes:
>
> > On 10.08.26 08:03, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> >> I've been playing around with the thought of introducing ncurses-based
> >> interfaces into Git. I've been mostly thinking about git-history(1) here
> >> so that you can just move commits around, squash them together, drop
> >> them and so on. But I think fancy stuff like TUIs can also be applied to
> >> other parts of Git, as well, to make things a bit more visual to our
> >> users and, as a consequence, easier to use.
> >
> > That sounds a whole lot like lazygit to me [1]; it does all those things
> > in a rather intuitive way, including Junio's original use case of
> > selecting a hunk and staging or discarding it.
> >
> > Is it really worth adding such functionality to core git? I like the
> > idea of tools specializing on what they do well; core git on providing
> > the core functionality, GUI tools on presenting it in a UI.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit
>
> My philosophy has always been "do not compete with your customer".
>
> If we add an officially sanctioned XYZ to 'git-core', it would hold
> an undue advantage over tools built on 'git-core' that perform the
> same task, not because ours is implemented better but merely
> because it comes bundled with 'git-core'. I do not want that.
>
> An exception is when our XYZ is truly of "we wish someone had
> written something better that offers functionality like this"
> quality, serving as a "usable but perhaps not pretty" demonstration.
I guess that's fair. As I said in my parallel reply to this message, I
could also see that having something like a git-history(1) UI might be
too much. But I think having a TUI for selecting individual hunks in a
better way compared to `git add -i` and friends might be sensible and
not significantly overlap with other projects.
Patrick
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-11 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-07 4:02 Can we do better than "git checkout/add -p" Junio C Hamano
2026-08-07 7:38 ` Christian Couder
2026-08-07 11:24 ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-08-07 15:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-08-07 20:12 ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-08-07 20:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-08-10 6:03 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-08-10 7:26 ` Stefan Haller
2026-08-10 8:45 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-08-10 15:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-08-11 5:06 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=anqt4a7L49W3BmZQ@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=ben.knoble@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=lists@haller-berlin.de \
--cc=schacon@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox