Hacker News Reader

Comment by spaetzleesser | Hacker News Reader

For me the staging area is almost the most important feature of git. I often use it to stage new code that already and then step by step add more code that works.

This only works if you use a GUI like Sourcetree . With the command like staging isn’t much fun.

View on HN

I use the git command line almost exclusively and find it preferable to other tools for manipulating the staging area.

I have repeatedly tried to use it with the command line but I just can't get the hang of it.

Which part gives you issues, adding things or removing things?

Working at file granularity is fine, but I've never gotten a good workflow for using the CLI to stage individual hunks. Nothing beats selecting the lines I care about in magit (or any other GUI) and clicking to stage.

git add --interactive <file>, then mark the file as staged and select the patch option if memory serves. It's not complex once you get the hang of it. The only problem I run into is not being able to split chunks further.

I do agree a GUI lowers the barrier to entry.

Use git add -p <file>

And you'll go straight to the patch option. Then you can split the chunks further, and for hunks that can't be split further, you can edit them and add/remove lines from the hunk as needed.

Thanks, didn't know about that shorthand!

The way it’s displayed and then also the commands. With Sourcetree you have a really nice display and it’s very efficient to stage/upstage/discard lines and hunks. I am sure I could get used to the command line with enough practice but source control tools are pretty low on my list of priorities of things I want to get better with. So I stick to what works for me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com