![]() To be fair, Gitkraken isn’t really slow, it’s slower than Fork. Integrations are great, but it doesn’t feel worth juggling PAT’s to make it work. Gitkraken is leaning into some distinguishing features like it’s Terminal, Workspaces, and other integrations which is nice BUT I don’t care as much about that as I do some other things like:įork is massively almost overwhelmingly superior in both of these aspects. The UI differences are there but they’re not significant, and yet I feel like Gitkraken is a bit nicer. That sounds like the correct behaviour, but recently in Fork I ticked “Remove stash after applying” and moved on, but it was remembered the next time which I didn’t want. Perhaps it’s the fact that the defaults and flows mean I get less prompts, and if I set something that ISN’T a default, it’s NOT remembered. It’s defaults fit my workflow quite well, and SOMETHING about it just feels a bit nicer. Reading all the above “facts”, it feels like I’m leaning towards Gitkraken, and to some extent I am. Sometimes it doesn’t matter what the tool does, it’s more about how it feels. Has a custom terminal with additional git features.Has it’s own Workspaces feature allowing a custom board and whatnot for teams, etc.They both have similar features, although I’d say Gitkrakens is slightly better, better syntax highlighting, better support for entire file view, etc. Inlines branch/tag with commit message, shows SHA and commit timeīranch/tag pulls out to left, hides commit time a little Single button, rebase by default (I think)įails with Git output, needed to tick box in modal Yearly subscription instead of one-off payment. ![]() Nice defaults and helpful suggestions (do you want to force push?).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |