Good luck doing anything remotely complicated/useful in git with an IDE. You get a small fraction of what git can do with a tool that allows absolutely 0 scripting and automation.
IDE git is less powerful than CLI git. However I’m pretty confident that most people use more features of git by using a GUI.
CLI feature discoverability is pretty awful, you have to go out of your way and type git help to learn new commands.
With a GUI though, all the buttons are there, you just have to click a new button that you’ve been seeing for a while and the GUI will guide you how to use it.
It sounds like you don’t speak from experience. I have all the automation I need. It supports git hooks on top of IDE-only features like code checking.
If I have to fire up my CLI for some mass history rewriting (like changing an author for every commit), or when the repo breaks - so be it. But by not using the CLI I save my fingers and sanity, because committing a bunch of files is several click away with little to no room for error.
I can rebase, patch, drop, rename, merge, revert, cherry pick, and solve conflicts with a click of a button rather than remembering all the commands and whatnot.
There are automations. You can even add git hooks iirc. Mostly I find the lint and other code quality integrations nice to have in the IDE, since the inline results allow me to navigate directly to the code
Good luck doing anything remotely complicated/useful in git with an IDE. You get a small fraction of what git can do with a tool that allows absolutely 0 scripting and automation.
IDE git is less powerful than CLI git. However I’m pretty confident that most people use more features of git by using a GUI.
CLI feature discoverability is pretty awful, you have to go out of your way and type
git helpto learn new commands.With a GUI though, all the buttons are there, you just have to click a new button that you’ve been seeing for a while and the GUI will guide you how to use it.
It sounds like you don’t speak from experience. I have all the automation I need. It supports git hooks on top of IDE-only features like code checking.
If I have to fire up my CLI for some mass history rewriting (like changing an author for every commit), or when the repo breaks - so be it. But by not using the CLI I save my fingers and sanity, because committing a bunch of files is several click away with little to no room for error.
I can rebase, patch, drop, rename, merge, revert, cherry pick, and solve conflicts with a click of a button rather than remembering all the commands and whatnot.
I use the cli, but my main goal is to never have to do anything remotely complicated with git. Does it happen sometimes? Of course.
There are automations. You can even add git hooks iirc. Mostly I find the lint and other code quality integrations nice to have in the IDE, since the inline results allow me to navigate directly to the code
Diffing is a lot easier too