Git Graph VS Code extension
I’ve used source tree, gitkraken, etc. this simple extension is just as good. I spend most my day with it
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
82 points (98.8% liked)
Programming
22034 readers
218 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Git Graph VS Code extension
I’ve used source tree, gitkraken, etc. this simple extension is just as good. I spend most my day with it
Off topic: day-after-day with these kinds of posts and especially the replies, I need Reddit less and less. That's a very good thing.
Git cola
The cli because it is consistent everywhere and has all fearures
The only thing I'm missing in the CLI is easy picking and choosing which change to include in a commit on a more fine grained basis than files. I sometimes have a changed file and the changes fix different issues and thus should get separate commits but with the CLI I can't easily select the changes to be staged. At least not AFAIK.
Edit: Richards law of posting something wrong to get fast correct answers seems to stay true, even on lemmy. Thanks for teaching me something today <3
Uhhh, git add -p?
the best git command
Hard agree haha, use this one constantly.
You can via git add -i foo.bar
I believe the only issue with that is that it can only go by hunks. If your changes are sufficiently far away, you can select them separately. But if you change one function that should be in patch a, and another function 5 lines down that should be in patch b, I think you're screwed
That being said, this is all from memory, so don't quote me on it
In interactive add mode you can use s to split a hunk, and e to edit it. That's usually enough for me to split things up.
I usually use git add -p to selectively stage hunks. But in git add -i I think running the patch command does the same thing to get into patch mode.
If patch mode shows you a hunk, and you only want some of the lines you can press s to split into smaller hunks. Then you'll be prompted whether to add each smaller hunk separately.
If you want to stage a change that is on the same line as a change you don't want to stage, or on an adjacent line, then you need to use e to edit the hunk. Git stages whatever changes are left when you're done editing. The file in the working tree on disk is unchanged.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Same, because its UX is actually really good. Years ago when I was new to git, I tried to use Sourcetree to revert a merge commit, and it would just fail. When I tried it in the CLI, it still failed, but it told me how to fix it. (I needed to specify which parent)
That, plus it’s scriptable, plus I’m in the terminal a lot anyway. I’ll also use the IDE git client sometimes if that’s where I am at the moment.
CLI first here too, for the same reason.
I'm not above using an editor plugin if it's simple and reliable and right there waiting, like VSCodium.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Tried idea community edition, honestly not bad, like vs code slightly more even tho with an extension or two you can make how they function very similar. Wanted to use idea because it matched the gtk theme, but if I was gonna use an extension for vs code like navigation might as well use vs code. Both easy to use with git as a dabbler.
I use VSCode and SourceGit. SourceGit is similar to Fork (which I've used before), but it's FOSS and cross-platform (Windows/macOS/Linux).
I mostly use git from the console.
- git with a bunch of aliases for common operations and making the log pretty.
- gitk when I need a UI to browse the history
- kdiff3 as mergetool
Lazy git most of the time, sourcegit for heavy duty stuff.
Lazygit.
It's what I use when I need a bit of a UI for some things. I use the terminal mostly but Lazygit is great.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
vscode with edamagit and the cli
Is Vscode a git client?
No one take from me though idk what I'm doing when it comes to programming stuff.
It is. Not as advanced as others but it still is nonetheless!
Vscode and gitlens for routine stuff, and then just CLI when push comes to shove and I need some more advanced feature.
Magit is what allowed me to finally commit to switching to Git full time.
It's such an excellent front-end for Git that I've known numerous workmates learn Emacs just to use Magit.
Fork !!!
It's hands down the best git client.
It's free as in: sublime text or winzip where they ask you once a month if you want to pay for it but you can just select: I'm still trying it out, and it gets out of your way.
- It's got a well designed tree graph like in GitKraken except it doesn't lag
- It's interactive rebasing is as smooth as JJ / LazyGit, so you can edit/rename/reorder your commits except you don't have to have to remember CLI flags since it has its own UI
- It's lets you commit individual lines by selecting them instead of adding/removing whole hunks like Sourcetree except it isn't filled with paper cuts where a feature breaks in an annoying way for 2 years and you have to do extra steps to keep using it how you want.
And one killer feature that I haven't seen any other git clients handle: allowing me to stage only one side of the diff. As in: if I change a line (so it shows up as one removed line and one new line in git), I can decide to add the new line change while still keeping the old line.
So changing this:
doThing(1);
into this:
doThing(2);
Shows up in git as:
- doThing(1);
+ doThing(2);
But if I still want to keep doThing(1);, I don't have to go back into my code to retype doThing(1);, or do any manual copy-pasting. I can just highlight and add only doThing(2); to the staging area and discard the change to doThing(1);.
So now the code exists as:
doThing(1);
doThing(2);
Now with a one-liner example like this, we could always re-enter the code again. But for larger code changes? It's far easier to just highlight the code in the diff and say: yes to this and no to the other stuff.
And when you get used to it, it makes it really easy to split what would be large git commits into smaller related changes keeping your git history clean and easy to understand.
I love Fork, bought the license to support the developer.
The only thing I don’t like is that there is no Linux version, asked the dev and he told me that the issue with Linux is that there are different distros with different GUI libraries so it would require multiple versions for Linux.
A bit saddened it I completely understand.
In case you're interested, git add <files> -p allows you to do this on the command line. I use it daily.
I still don't think it's nearly as convenient as being able to just see the changes side by side and click the one you want (or both). You can even easily modify the final outcome in the 3rd preview panel, in case you need to do a quick fix after a conflict resolution.
I’ll second Fork, it’s been my go to for years! Maybe I’ll pay for it one day
Mostly Magit, some CLI
Same. Magit 99% of the time and CLI for the one percent where I need to run an obscure command. Magit is genuinely one of the best things in Emacs besides org mode.
Magit is fantastic!!
CLI with some aliases for viewing commit history and branching, or less frequently an IDE plugin
Lazygit and magit
Lazygit. Used gitui for a long while but lazygit has vim key bindings which is much nicer and it also seems much more stable.
LazyGit and GitKraken. I try to use LazyGit as much as possible, but a few things are easier for me in GitKraken (as I'm more used to it).
Fork on windows, SourceGit on Linux, both have a similar UI layout to SourceTree, but are much faster/snappier.
I really like having a clear overview of the commit history, branches and current local state. I haven't figured out yet how to get such an "at a glance" overview in the CLI.
For advanced stuff the CLI is still very convenient.
I second Fork, been using it for years and it's fast, able to handle multiple actions at once. Can't recommend it enough!
load more comments
(3 replies)
TortoiseGit.
Through settings, I move the Show Log to the top context menu level, and it's my entry point to every Git operation.
I see a history tree to see and immediately understand commit and branch relationships and states. I can commit, show changes, diff, rebase interactive or not, push, fetch, switch, create branches and tags, squash and split commits, commit chunk-wise through "restet after commit", … And everything from a repo overview.
/edit: To add; other clients I tried never reached what I want from a UI/GUI, never reached TortoiseGit. Including IDE integrations where I'm already in the IDE; I prefer the separate better TortoiseGit.
GitButler is interesting for it's different approach, but when I tried it out the git auth didn't remember my key password. (Since trying out jj I found out it may have been due to disabled OpenSSH Service.)
load more comments
(3 replies)
GitKraken ❤️
If not present, vscode + gitlens
Github desktop, despite the name it's just a git client. Absolutely clownish that there's no official Linux support (there's a fork which works perfectly). I use it to interact with self-hosted gitea, codeberg and github, pretty happy with it, I'm Aldo testing git butler
I use plain old git for the same reasons already mentioned, but magit is the gold standard.
Fugitive, the vim / neovim plugin. It does everything the CLI does, but uses vim interfaces very effectively to enhance the experience. For example it's quite good for selectively staging changes from a file. I also like the option to open a buffer with the version of a file from any specified commit.
I also tried neogit which aims to port magit to neovim. I didn't like it as much. Partly because as far as I could tell at the time it lacked features compared to fugitive. But also because it seemed to want me to do everything through UIs in its own custom windows. Fugitive is integrated more thoroughly into vim via command mode, and special buffers.
view more: next ›