Lots of confused beginners in this thread. IMO diagrams, and tutorials, that take this approach to teaching git are the reason people have such a hard time. After learning the very basic commands, the next step is to learn the internal data structure of git at a conceptual level. This may seem like a bad design to some, and that is a reasonable thing to debate. It doesn’t change the reality that knowing basic git internals makes git much easier to use.
Looks great!<p>My 12-year old questioned why a 'pull request' is named the way it is. Obviously it's after the command 'git pull' which fetches the latest changes, then merges them, but it's confusing according to him, and should be called a 'merge request' instead. I don't disagree.
The most recent computerphile YT video [1] is talking about the inner workings of git (Inside the hidden git folder) which I found quite interesting. Anybody reading this that came across some previous article about how git works and couldn‘t be bothered (just like me) may find this interesting.<p>[1] <a href="https://youtu.be/bSA91XTzeuA" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/bSA91XTzeuA</a>
Coincidentally there was a pretty good Computerphile video released today about how git is working under the hood: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSA91XTzeuA" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSA91XTzeuA</a>
Then there’s NDPSoftware’s Git Cheatsheet which is interactive.<p>Click or tap the backgrounds or the arrows.<p><a href="https://ndpsoftware.com/git-cheatsheet.html#loc=local_repo;" rel="nofollow">https://ndpsoftware.com/git-cheatsheet.html#loc=local_repo;</a>
I use Github but every time I do something it feels like I’m going to break the whole project. Looking at this map, I realize I basically know nothing.<p>Where did all you guys learn how to use GitHub?
Interesting idea, I’d love to have more context; to hear who this is aimed at, and what it’s for or how it’s meant to be used. Is this helpful for either git newbies, or git experts? I feel like if you don’t already know git, this map doesn’t actually explain what rebase or stash or clone or any commands really do without a very long side-explanation attached. The image doesn’t clarify what the wide arrows (e.g. reset) do differently than the solid lines or the dashed lines. It’s cool to see the local & remote repos sort-of mapped out if you know git, but it seems like the explanatory power of this might be lower than talking about it, or maybe mixing many images, even for experts? Sorry I don’t mean to be overly critical, just curious what the goal is.
Same energy as: <a href="https://ptrthomas.files.wordpress.com/2006/06/jtrac-callstack1.png?w=349&zoom=2" rel="nofollow">https://ptrthomas.files.wordpress.com/2006/06/jtrac-callstac...</a><p>In that the image works equally well as elegance for some, and criticism for others.
I personally find this to be the best video on git by far:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sjqTHE0zok" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sjqTHE0zok</a> (MIT OpenCourseWare, Missing Semester).<p>1h25mn well spent
This only explains one particular git flow. A simpler explanation is possible especially when you don't treat the named branches in a special manner