On 24 Mar 2009, at 11:48, Ciaran wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Tekin Suleyman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I find Git's command line to be very scary - but then again I very >> rarely use command line for SVN either. The best GUI I have found >> so far for OS X & Git is GitX - http://gitx.frim.nl/. Really made >> it a pleasure to work with Git. Still no-where near 100% >> comfortable with Git though. >> >> -D >> >> On 23/3/09 20:48, Ashley Moran wrote: >>> >>> On 23 Mar 2009, at 19:12, Ciaran wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Currently Git appears to be evil, it hurts my head, my commit logs >>>> on github are embarrasing at best <g> >>>> -cj. >>>> >>> Last project I worked on where I couldn't choose my own SCM, I got >>> to >>> pick between SVN and git. I went with git on the basis that it'd >>> let >>> me work in a more atomic, darcs-like cherry-picking manner, rather >>> than the "daily backup to subversion" strategy I was used to with >>> SVN. After a few weeks trying to remember how to use the >>> interface, I >>> gave up and just started doing `git commit -a`. Git, I'm sorry to >>> say, is to SCM as Gentoo is to Linux distros. Fine if you can >>> figure >>> out how the hell it works, not good if you want an easy way to >>> manage >>> source. > > > Wow, sounds like a git talk is definitely a good call then! > > I can understand that people find the move to git from svn > difficult, probably not helped by the lack of a decent GUI. But it > really doesn't take much to get the hang of working at the command > prompt. And once you do, you usually find that it's a much more > powerful way of working. You only really need to learn a handful of > commands, and with a couple of handy aliases you'll have done in a > few key presses what would have taken a hell of a lot longer with a > GUI. > > Having said all that, I have no experience of darcs, mercurial or > bzr so looking forward to hearing all about them too - maybe I'll > see the error of my ways! Either way, here's hoping I can help shed > some light on the dark art of git to those that are interested. > I think I understand it reasonably well now (a suitable purchas of > Practical Version Control with Git from the pragmatic programmers > helps ;) )... but the thing that keeps getting me, is when I'm > somehow working, but not on a branch, and I commit... it lets me > commit, I can see in the log I've commited, bu t where to?! .. If I > switch to my master then how do I get my changes across, where've > they gone ?
Yeah, this is where Git starts to get a bit scary :-) Essentially they've gone on to a non-permanent branch which then gets orphaned at the point you switch back to master. However (and this has saved my bacon more than a few times) you can retrieve missing commits with 'git fsck --lost-found', although you need to do a bit more manipulation with the returned list to get to the actual commit messages.. I've not tried the prag prog book but my recommendation for reading is the Git Internals PDF from Peepcode - does a really good job of simplifying the science! Asa --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NWRUG" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nwrug-members?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
