gitui does not support vim keybinding for me, or I did not find out how.
rust's size always surprise me:
tig -- 600KB, gitui: 11MB
similar size pattern for other utilties, in general, rust executable is about 200x larger than its c/c++ peers, and, they all linked to similar c/c++ libraries, looks like rust stdlib is pretty big in size to me.
looks like there's a key binding file to enable vim bindings.
Having said that, I'm also a tig user and at least at first glance, I prefer its simplicity. Gitui presents a huge amount of info on the default screen and spends quite a lot of real estate drawing borders around everything. Tig just takes me straight to the commit history, full screen and then I have single key actions to get to other views.
The only thing I don't like with Tig is how little it binds to keys with the expectation that you set up your own mappings to git commands. I would prefer it baked more of them in so they would be standard and documented ... but that is a minor complaint.
rust binaries are statically linked, that's the big difference. If you included all the libc code statically in most c programs they'd probably also be pretty big
Go programs are also statically linked and Go based CLI tools generally only come in at 3-4 MB IIRC. I've used static linking in binaries in Nim and C programs too with similar (or smaller) sizes.
when i have an embedded board with say 64mb storage,a few rust executable will fill them up fast. problem is that rust does not give me option to do dynamic link to its stdlib.
After you do `cargo build --release`, you will notice you hello world EXE is much smaller than a typical rust binary. Like 10~20KB small. On Windows it runs just fine. On Linux, I has to change the exe's RPATH to look for the standard library in the current directory:
patchelf --set-rpath '$ORIGIN' ./exe_name
Anyways, it is possible. The rustc compiler itself is shipped in this way.
as far as i know,this is not officially supported.rust links to its stdlib statically by design. when you have to share this stdlib with a few dynamically linked rust crates it's hard to do in practice.
tried all size reduction tricks,still the size is much large,like 15x large than c,c++. even the stdlib is a 3x larger than to libstdc++
It only does a fraction of what magit does. I just use it for scrolling though the commit history, occasionally searching messages, and it's my tool of choice for staging/unstaging hunks.
It's the only tool I use to compliment the git cli.
I see. have you tried magit as a comparison? while magit can do everything it's got a very easy interface for most tasks. I don't use emacs for anything but magit to the point where i have a magit command on the command line to open up emacs in the current directory and then a spc-g-g opens up magit. it's that good.
Just tried Lazygit and one thing that stands out is it is the first of these tools that offers some kind of support for submodules (like, I can select a submodule and then navigate into that context and back out again).
It's great that all these options are becoming available and bringing ideas into the mix.
Gitui's README mentions that Lazygit freezes and sometimes crashes parsing large repos, taking the example of the linux repo, and reports that Gitui is more than twice as fast: https://github.com/extrawurst/gitui#3--benchmarks-top-
At least for the stability issues, does this match your experience?
I see others have mentioned tig here as well, I'd be curious to hear if they also find it somewhat slow and unstable. Gitui's linux benchmark lists it as being almost 11 times faster than tig.
I use tig intensively and it does sometimes have little freezes etc but only on giant repos AND where the file system is slow / busy. Its a 2nd or 3rd order type problem to me. If you work all the time on that type of repo it might be more important.
I've used this non stop for months now, it's so good! You can get it from neovim as well as your git plugin and merge resolver if you don't want to use fugitive or something else. https://github.com/kdheepak/lazygit.nvim
I'm a long time user and big fan of lazygit. It substantially increases my productivity for the most common tasks. I am a sole developer working on multiple web site projects.
At some point I often wonder why people are so damn intent on living in their terminals. This is an ASCII GUI with the exact same feature set that `git cola` offers which is extremely lightweight and keyboard friendly. The only difference is you can't click on something if you forget the keyboard shortcut.
Have relied on magit for so long now I am not even sure if I "know git" anymore. Definitely can't imagine doing a complicated rebase without it, or (ab)using stashes so much.
Emacs is basically a textual application library (a curses alternative). It's often perceived as a text editor, but not using Magit because it's implemented on Emacs is like not using X because it's implemented on curses
I suspect it’s possible to only learn a few things, e.g. C-g to get unstuck, C-x C-c to quit, some config to have a key to open magit status or a clever bash alias, and then the keys in magit for which there is documentation (regular Emacs is also documented) and semi-documented in that when you e.g. press c to start a commit, a pop up appears with eg flags you can set or commit-like actions like reword/amend.
It's quite linear if you're using the manual / C-h prefix. More like a spiral if you're like me and keep reaching for external packages to solve problems you're not sure you have. Either way it's really worth it.
Emacs with spacemacs or doom-emacs’s spacemacs layer (both lf which use vim bindings aka “evil mode”) is quite similar to vim as far as text editing goes. For me this made the initial learning curve pretty approachable.
Do you happen to know if neovim has a helm-ag analog? For the most part that and magit are the only two things I use in emacs anymore and would love to try something lighter weight.
I'm by no means an expert, but is it really that hard to remember clone, pull, commit -a, push and maybe something else you'd need. That you need a GUI? And even then you can either use the help or man or just Google it and you'll remember the right command sooner than later.
Or am I missing some quite important? I've been using this for most of the stuff that I do in github and it seemed to be enough.
I use these on my Chromebook, but on my stationary computer I just use the integration in VS Code.
I feel like you are. The operations you mentioned - clone, pull, “commit -a”, and push - are trivial. Nobody needs a nice UI for those.
But in real day-to-day use, I’m branching, merging, creating and applying stashes, cherry picking, rebasing, browsing the repo history, browsing specific file histories, diffing across branches, selectively committing specific changes in a file, etc. and it’s convenient to have a nice UI for the more advanced use cases.
People who use commit -a terrify me. The value of a tool like this is it makes it trivial to review changes, stashes, etc. in a convenient way without needing to look up commands. This tool in particular is built to handle huge repos which most other front ends straight up can't. And it does it with a 1mb binary and almost no ram.
git add -p is my default. Usually what I have been up to belongs in 2-3 separate commits, each with a good commit message. For example a bug found and fixed while developing a feature always goes in its own commit.
Speaking as to "why would you not just use command line git, or VSCode integration".
Two aspects: Speed, and discoverability.
These are two things that magit massively improves upon the command line.
e.g. to make the commit, in magit, it's the key sequence "<Spc> g g" (to open magit) then "c c" to commit. (Being able to quickly do this from the same place you edit code is very convenient).
In terms of discoverability, magit shows me the common options for commands (e.g. it shows `-a autostash` for git pull), or other commands which might be useful that I've not used (like git worktree).
I use a git GUI (Sourcetree) as a time saving tool to visualize the git repo, browse through commits to view changes, diff non adjacent commits or branches, etc. I have never used it to actually alter the state of my repo, all that is much easier on the command line for me. But TUI is woefully inadequate for getting the hang of even a moderately complex repo that I'm trying to understand.
which means “git add all and commit with this message” very rarely do I make a mistake with this. Maybe once every 3 weeks, in which case I just restore the file I accidentally added.
I use fugitive, a Git interface that operates from within [n]vim. There are many advantages to using Git from within an editor, especially as so many Git operations land you in an editor in any case; this way, you stay in your editor context, so, for example, you get completions from your other windows when composing your commit messages.
Is there a Web UI equivalent for tools like this, where one can spin up a web server pointing to a git repo on the server and do commit, diff, merging, graph visualisation etc. through a web interface?
Not exactly what you are looking for, but github.dev provides much of this for repos hosted at github. Press . while accessing the repository at github.com to jump right into github.dev (this appears to require me being logged in so it's possible I configured this somehow).
Looks great and fast! Nice work! I'm wondering if the missing features for 1.0 will keep it fast. (The first thing I wanted to do is search the log and see the graph :-). Does not look like it.
