6 ms·
Git should store the commands that "did" the operations on a repo. Git should never ever let you lose work. I should always be able to go "backward" and recov
by pjettter 5y ago
Git should store the commands that "did" the operations on a repo.
Git should never ever let you lose work.
I should always be able to go "backward" and recover previous states. I guess that is what the "Git undo" proposal is about.
I'm a very visual person so I tend to use Git Graph on VSCode.
But I still get in trouble. Especially things like Cherry Picking, or reverting.
Another thing that is not so easy is switching branches without having to do a commit. Stashing, yeah, but then figuring out whether stashes have been applied or not, diffing between branches, picking some changes from a diff.
In the end I stick to some basic commands that don't get me in trouble so that I don't lose half a day to recover my work via Dropbox.
- prisonality 5y ago> Git should store the commands that "did" the operations on a repo. is `git reflog` not enough for your use case ?
- pjettter 5y agoNo, I mean more like an audit trail. Not like `blame` either. What I typed on the command line to get into a new state.
- sixstringtheory 5y agoWhat about `history | grep “^git”? Edit to add: the downside is that it only works in the current terminal session. To workaround that for myself, I have a fish shell post exec function that records the last command run, plus a bunch of metadata, to a log file.