Show HN: Gitgpt – Natural Language Git

It&#x27;s pretty useful as a lookup, but these tools are similar to a knife that auto-magically orients itself to help with cutting.<p>Some tools should be as dumb as possible so that act as extensions of the user with zero tolerance.<p>Play and buffer between intent and action creates a long tail of potentially disastrous unknown edge cases and also interferes with the feedback loop that prevents mastery.<p>Memorizing git commands to get it just-so is usually a chore so this is pretty helpful. Still wouldn&#x27;t trust it w&#x2F;o double checking the output cmd though.

Not sure what value it adds though. Isn’t it easier to type the cmds then to write all that?<p>If there’s a good product in it I’m afraid your examples aren’t selling it :S<p>Was first thinking it could have value for when you forget a cmd or when learning, but I think if you can come up with those technical instructions you can also remember the cmds …

Or we could get off the cargo-cult need to use git on every single project everywhere regardless of how suitable it is for that team&#x27;s needs.<p>If your tool of choice is so actively user-hostile that it needs another tool on top to understand it for you, then perhaps you&#x27;ve picked the wrong tool. I don&#x27;t need to read the &quot;vi book&quot; to understand how to perform basic edits to my files without borking it in ways that just deleting the whole thing and restoring from backup is the easiest way out. Why should it be the case for my revision control system?<p>Why a revision control system designed for a de-centralised team sharing patches over email has become the industry standard for centralised teams not sharing patches over email is a mystery, and I suspect one we&#x27;ll look back on in 10 years or so and wonder what on earth we were thinking.

The prompt is to the point:<p><pre><code> prompt = &quot;Provide only the appropriate git commands for:&quot; + prompt </code></pre> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Hesse&#x2F;gitgpt&#x2F;blob&#x2F;9c78e40d5ebdefdf0a4a8297d2f88b5a8d82ffad&#x2F;main.go#L44">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Hesse&#x2F;gitgpt&#x2F;blob&#x2F;9c78e40d5ebdefdf0a4a829...</a>

let&#x27;s not give language models unrestricted access to our shells please. This is like allowing remote code execution from an insane person.

Nice! I don&#x27;t intend to discount the work you&#x27;ve done here, but want to point out that GitHub Copilot has a CLI tool for exactly this as well as other arbitrary shell commands. It&#x27;s pretty polished and has performed well for me so far.<p>It is on a waitlist, but I got accepted after a couple weeks.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;githubnext.com&#x2F;projects&#x2F;copilot-cli&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;githubnext.com&#x2F;projects&#x2F;copilot-cli&#x2F;</a>

That looks cool, though I&#x27;d be very concerned about the possibility about ChatGPT &quot;hallucinating&quot; a `rm -rf &#x2F;` or equivalent.

I feel like we have reached the “solution in search of a problem” stage.

&gt; Interfacing with git sucks<p>I disagree

I&#x27;ve been looking for something similar for AI git commit messages... basically feed ChatGPT a git diff and ask it what changed and to write a git message. I&#x27;ve done this directly in the ChatGPT UI with some small changes and it produces some great messages...<p>I would be very concerned to run this on company code or large diffs. But small simple commits, which should be the goal with commit messages anyways, would take away some of the tedium of the git flow.

But ... can it unbreak a broken merge? It should at least take a look at the git state before executing. There is potential in explaining to the user what is happening.

I&#x27;ve been waiting for someone to build this. My hope is it will simplify recovering from the myriad forms of &quot;I just did something I didn&#x27;t want&quot; that occasionally happen with git (and that I&#x27;ve historically used [0] to resolve)<p>[0]<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sethrobertson.github.io&#x2F;GitFixUm&#x2F;fixup.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sethrobertson.github.io&#x2F;GitFixUm&#x2F;fixup.html</a>

This is cool but I tried sending the same text with my general purpose GPT (text-davinci-003) command line tool and it did the same thing. This one is mine: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;runvc&#x2F;askleo">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;runvc&#x2F;askleo</a><p>There are other ones of course.

I&#x27;d like to see a GPT tool that had ingested the manpages and documentation for all the tools I use, answer my questions based on that. I will type in the commands myself. Bonus points if it included links to the docs so I can double-check.

Absolutely wasted opportunity. You could have called it &quot;Chat GitPT&quot;

I think this would be a wonderful tool for git learners if you would explain the git commands a bit. For example: git add *.py ; This command adds all the python files to the staging list.<p>You get the gist.

&gt; Interfacing with git sucks.<p>I really don&#x27;t get this sentiment, to me git is one of the best software ever written, it&#x27;s intuitive, customizable and extensible.

I think this is a cool idea but why stop at git? Why not expand to any CLI program. Maybe someone already did that.

This is very cool. I feel like this should be an eventual good replacement for essentially all man&#x2F;help pages.

All these tools need openAI keys … give me one model that is self hosted with an API endpoint …

Can it fix merge conflicts?

&gt; Interfacing with git sucks<p>[citation needed]

<p><pre><code> c++gpt</code></pre>

thanks, I hate it.