On 14/10/2007, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But just saying "MY GOD FIX THE UI" is not a wishlist item (yes, > that was a real survey answer). It provides the community no > chance to understand what parts of the UI we need to work on, and > what parts the end-user is OK with or just hasn't even tried to use. My interpretation of that answer is that your average user (specifically Windows user) is more focused on a graphical interface, and will mean GUI when they say UI. The core plumbing in git is solid. The porcelain, with the 1.5 series, makes git simpler to use from the command line. Now, the GUI available for git is seriously lacking. If you look at the GUI tools available for CVS, SVN, Perforce and others, these offer you the complete functionality of those tools from within them. They provide command line tools for those that need them, but also come with a GUI application that allows the user to manage their files within the source control system they are using (e.g. WinCVS and P4V), shell integration (e.g. TortoiseCVS/SVN), IDE integration and others. At the moment, git has a good timeline view of commits through the GUI, but have found the mingw version to be slow in places (I can't remember when, but was likely before some performance improvements in that area were made) and haven't tried out the Linux version yet. This is a good starting point to build on, but to be more useful it needs to extend to all of git's functionality. - Reece - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
