I know, Git is a mess. But, since we're stuck with it, we may as well try to learn how it works with resources like this, which aims to lead to some form of Git enlightenment.
Highlights: Haskell instead of Scheme, JSON instead of sexps, SSH instead of OpenPGP, additional features such as per-file authorizations and unsigned merge commits.
Then if I hit the situation from the video where there are new commit(s) on the remote, #git stops the merge and displays a message. At that point I can decide how to handle it.
Dear #logseq and #obsodian users, #git is not a backup system. Store your notes in a reposotory, if you must, but please configure a backup for your notes.
Folks who squash their #git merges, I’m curious why you are making that trade-off. I’m guessing the pro argument is a cleaner merge graph?
The big argument against it for me is that you lose granularity for git bisect. I've often been able to narrow down breakage (sometimes long past the merge) due to individual commits in the merge. If I'd merged in a giant blob all I'd have had to go by is that giant blob. (1/2)
I have a branch that says it's up to date with the upstream (fork of a repo). I'm trying to contribute a patch, but my commit history in the PR has 26 commits from things that have already been merged rather than my changes from the current head.
Is there an acceptable way to clean up that history so my PR is clean?
Manager: Lets teach a non-developer office worker how to push code to git. "It's just clicking a few buttons. I've done it before. It's not that hard."
oct-git focuses exclusively on ergonomic use with OpenPGP card-based signing keys
It is designed to be easy to set up, standalone (no long running processes), and entirely hands-off to use (no repeated PIN entry required, by default). It comes with desktop notifications for touch confirmation (if required)