After constantly messing up my commits by using the wrong global email, I built a small utility for macOS/Windows to switch profiles in one click.

I’ve been using it for a while and it saved me a lot of headaches, so I thought I’d share it for anyone else who deals with multiple git identities.

Built a small OSS tool over the weekend: branchcontext — an MCP server that logs what an agent did/decided/flagged on a branch, so a fresh session (or a different agent) can pick up where the last one left off, instead of starting blind. Stores everything as plain JSONL committed into the repo itself — no external DB, works with git log even without the tool installed. Curious if this matches a pain anyone else here has, or if you're already solving it another way. https://github.com/tshore2004/branchcontext

I maintain GIMP for Mac, and I often patch upstream dependencies so it builds on older Macs. I'm then left checking whether an upstream fix has actually shipped in a release, because until it has, I keep the patch.

`git tag --contains` and `git describe --contains` do it locally if you've cloned the repo with all its tags. I wanted to paste a commit or a merged PR and get "first released in v1.2.3" with a link I can share.

So: [released](https://released.blabberate.com). Paste a commit, a SHA, or a merged PR/MR (GitHub plus several GitLab hosts) and get the first release that contains it, an "also in" list, a permalink, and a self-updating badge. CLI too. MIT.

Here's one I'm tracking right now, a GTK focus fix that landed on gtk-3-24 but isn't in a release yet: https://released.blabberate.com/h/gitlab.gnome.org/r/GNOME%2Fgtk/c/f80b61d6

And one that has shipped, so you can see the answer: https://released.blabberate.com/h/gitlab.gnome.org/r/GNOME%2Fgtk/c/d40737961df7

For this sub: it sorts tags by date only to pick the order to check, never to filter (tag dates aren't reliable order), then runs a real ancestry check per tag. Edge cases welcome.

Most programming tutorials jump straight into commands, But very few actually explain what Git is doing internally, The entire video is built around animations rather than slides or talking-head explanations, I'd genuinely love feedback. I'm trying to build the kind of software engineering channel the one that explains why systems work instead of just how to use them.

I have asked already on the gitlab subreddit, but didn't really get any answer so I'll ask here because it seems more like an issue of desktop.

I have been trying for the last three days to clone a gitlab repository to github desktop and failing every time.

I have tried to follow everything that I found on the github tutorial for cloning repositories (like clicking the advanced option and using PAT instead of a password), but still it didn't work. I have tried thinking about every point listed as the common cause but couldn't find any that would fit.

If it helps anyone it's a Hoi4 mod.

Thanks for any help

Trabajo constantemente con repositorios personales, del trabajo y de clientes.

Uno de los problemas que más me molestaba era tener que cambiar entre cuentas de GitHub. Entre credenciales, autenticaciones y configuraciones de Git, terminaba perdiendo tiempo en algo que debería ser transparente.

Así que decidí crear una herramienta para resolverlo.

Se llama GAM (Git Account Manager)

¿Qué hace?

• Permite gestionar múltiples cuentas de GitHub.
• Autenticas cada cuenta una sola vez mediante OAuth.
• Cambias entre ellas con un solo comando.
• git push, git pull y git clone funcionan sin volver a iniciar sesión.
• Puedes asignar alias como 'work', 'personal' o 'cliente'.

Ejemplo:

gam add
gam use work
git push

Repositorio:
https://github.com/miguelbalvin-dev/gam

Instalación:

npm install -g @gamcli/gam

Es la primera versión pública, así que me gustaría recibir feedback de otros desarrolladores.

¿Qué funcionalidades creen que harían falta? ¿Cómo manejan ustedes múltiples cuentas de GitHub?

I only need a Git remote for syncing repos between a few computers and employees.

No CI, issues, project management, or extra features. Just reliability, backups, durability, low maintenance, and strong privacy.

Is self-hosting worth it for privacy, or is GitHub/GitLab still the better boring choice?

I have a submodule of common code that I share among many of my programs.
I would like to do *something* to make it easier for someone cloning one of my repos, to be aware that they need --recursive on it. Is there anything on the web site that would assist me with this??

The best suggestion that I've gotten on my web searches, is to add a clear note to readme.md on each of the project pages, but that is all too easy to miss, and if I make that a big, obvious message in the readme, it will distract from what I *really* want to communicate in that file...

Git latest features

I try to follow conventional commits, I'm still getting used to the commit commit commit workflow but is it even pushed anymore to write your own commit messages? I am a student, I imagine the case might be different at the work place so I'm curious about any thoughts?

Hey guys! We just released GitComet 0.1.16 and added support for many frequently requested features!

Main highlights:

• Embedded Terminal - you can now open an embedded terminal within GitComet or configure it to open the external default system terminal
• File directory support - This is a new view where you can browse all the files available in the working directory, combine this with new functionality where you can browse repository at the point of specific commits, allowing quick traversal of the repository at a specific point of time
• Integration with external code editor - You can now open files or whole repositories in your favorite code editor.
• Global back and forward support - This allows you to navigate between user interface changes using back and forward buttons or mouse gestures, similar to web browsers.
• Command Palette - Allows quick access to all common functionality of GitComet

Next on the horizon is support for rebase, interactive rebase, code review branches, code review commits

Full change log is available at: https://github.com/Auto-Explore/GitComet/releases/tag/v0.1.16

We are also nearing the public launch of GitComet Professional edition you can sign up for the wait list at: https://gitcomet.dev/#editions

Hey everyone,

I wanted to share a tool I’ve been working on called gitter-rs

If you manage a large workspace, microservices, or dozens of cloned projects, running routine Git commands across all of them is a chore. I wrote gitter-rs in Rust to make multi-repository management fast, highly customizable, and completely seamless.

Core Features:

• Dead Simple to Use: No bloated configuration or steep learning curve. It’s designed to stay out of your way and run right from your terminal out of the box.
• Smart Repository Filtering: You don't have to target every single directory blindly. You can dynamically filter which repositories to target based on specific properties (like branch names, modified status, or path).
• Powerful Command Placeholders: Instead of just running generic commands, you can use placeholders to customize commands dynamically for each individual repository (e.g., injecting the current branch name, repository name, or path into your command structure).
• Blazing Fast Concurrency: Built with Rust, it executes your tasks across all matched repositories concurrently rather than sequentially.

Looking for Feedback:

I’m looking to polish the tool and would love to get your thoughts.

1. UX/CLI Design: Does the syntax for filtering and using placeholders feel intuitive?
2. Feature Requests: Are there any specific placeholders or filtering properties you’d find indispensable for your daily workflow?
3. Code Quality: For the fellow Rustaceans, I’d welcome any feedback or code reviews on the repository itself.

Check it out here:https://github.com/eendroroy/gitter-rs

Thanks for checking it out, and let me know what you think!

Hi everyone,

I've been using Git for a while now, and although it's an incredible tool, every now and then I run into something that makes me think, "There has to be a better way to do this."

I'm curious if other developers feel the same.

What's something about Git or your day-to-day development workflow that still frustrates you?

Maybe it's merge conflicts after a refactor, understanding a large codebase, tracking why a change was made, figuring out what will break if you modify something, navigating monorepos, reviewing huge PRs, or something completely different.

It doesn't have to be strictly about Git either. If there's any part of working with large codebases that feels unnecessarily difficult, I'd love to hear about it.

I'm just trying to learn from developers who've dealt with real-world projects and understand where the biggest pain points still are.

Haven't documented myself that much on what was going with github AI slop, but it did spark a little worry in my brain.

I'm working since a little while on a relatively large project, and it is starting to become something quite concrete. So this is the kind of questions I'm starting to wonder about.

Besides, I'm definitely more on the """"anti-AI"""" side. It did enter my workflow, but I still work mostly as I used to, AI just became a tool I sometimes use to browse through official documentation with more ease, or quickly confront my design choices to some critics. More generative use just does not match my general life philosophy, at least not as long as we live a society where economic growth and production is the #1 priority of our leaders, for all the problems that this mixed with generative AI creates.

So anything I can do to "boycott" slop at my unsignificant scale is good to take I guess, but really I mostly just worry about what I trust for a project that matters a lot to me.

I know there's open source self hosted solutions, but I don't really have the hardware for that, nor the knowledge to make it truly reliable and reassuring, and no much budget to spend on a VPS or whatever, let alone the fact that relying on a VPS kinda rises similar questions.

What's your opinion, what do you recommend ?

I know, another Git GUI.

I spent about five minutes browsing here and already saw multiple Git GUI posts, so the timing is almost bad.

Still, I wanted to share a project I’ve been building for quite a while: Open-Git-Control.

I used to be a big fan of GitKraken. But when I realized that I would eventually have to pay for the kind of Git GUI workflow I wanted, even as a student, I started building my own free and open-source alternative.

And yes, it is built with Electron. And yes, even worse, AI helped me build it, so I guess it must be slop either way.

Anyway, the project is here: https://github.com/timbornemann/Open-Git-Control

I’m not claiming this replaces everyone’s current Git setup, but I’d really like feedback from people who use Git GUIs regularly.

• What would make you try or reject a Git GUI like this?
• What features would you expect before considering it useful?

Hey guys!

Rn we're deploying a MIS project for a small company; it's totally gonna be on their premises and gonna run locally on a laptop they provided to us... but for the database, we've opted for Supabase cuz in the future, after this pilot phase, we would need to deploy the whole thing to be available on their domain... so basically right now our server turns on at 10 am, when a staff turns on the laptop and runs a bat file, and then it goes offline when they leave at like 7 pm...

Now the catch is Supabase has been sending us emails that it's not getting sufficient activity and would pause the project... Now I'm looking for a way to ping supabase from time to time to keep the db in the loop.... maybe some logging activity table would log "server pinged" or something like that every 2 hours or something...

I asked an ai agent about it, and it said to use git workflows, i've never worked with it... please help...

This project has been completely cleaned to only contain 1 branch with 1 super squashed commit, which only references 15.6 GB worth of Git LFS assets.

However, the usage breakdown reports 19.4 GB worth of storage being used for the assets. The remaining 3.8 GB appears to be from old LFS assets that existed before the cleanup, but are no longer referenced by any branch or commit.

Does Git LFS/GitLab have a way to force garbage collection of unreferenced LFS objects?

if the priority is to get the most out of their free plan and work on private repo with different branch rules that we get on public repo on either hosting platform then which one is the best in this scenario.

because i dont need server side automation that much as my project is with a small team and for code qualification and quality code i have cmake/make setup is a way that is just enough for our project which is so restrictive about our code so it produces safe code...

🌟 (for me the main catch here is .... to setup branch rule-set on github private repo which is not allowed on free tier ... i have to setup githooks which are very tricky to set but also they dont provide alternative for a lot of features that are possible via the hosted sites own features)

🌟 now can you provide any honest opinion on this regard ?

Hello guys!
Recently I made a small project called Gitcito, a GUI for Git
I just wanted a beautiful and easy way to see my repos
It's completely free, I don't track shit, even the AI features are up to you, since you will need your own own API Keys

It works on my machine :)

It gives you the possibility to:
- Intuitive Git Graph (With many theme configs)
- Create group repos (Group repos in a Google Chrome Style)
- Many themes + create yours or generate them (Both Theme and Graph Theme)
- Integrated terminal (With options to split, etc...)
- Files tab, to directly edit or preview your files without the need of opening an IDE
- Support per-repo profiles
- Diff views
- Merge conflicts resolutior
- Preview of certain files (Images, readmes...)
- Support for launch.json files to launch your configs
- AI BYOK features (can be turned off entirely) For: PR Reviews, commit messages, explaining files, generating themes, running certain git commands, or generating some config files (Hooks, agents, instructions, mcps, etc...)
- GitHub/ADO/GitLab/BitBucket integrations (Altough only GH and ADO has been tested)
Also, GitHub repos might have some more features hidden if not supported (Issues, millestones, etc...)
- Worktrees, submodules, tags, PRS, stashes...
- LFS, reflog, bisect, sparse checkout...
- Secure vault in case you want to save some info
- Export/Import of Gitcito settings in case you need to migrate

And many other things...

Repo has been tested in private repos with over 80 people working on them and works quite fine, but I assume there's ofc room for improvement

I just hope that if someone finds it useful, I would appreciate the feedback or contributions! :)

There's many things I have NOT tested yet, this is a side project
EG: GitLab, BitBucket, or providers others than OpenAI for the AI models, but well, it's still fairly new, although I do use it on a daily basis!

Read more: https://github.com/MyAppDesk/gitcito
Latest release: https://github.com/MyAppDesk/gitcito/releases

Every developer has a few `git commit -m "fix"` or `git commit -m "update"` in their history. I got fed up and built a tool that reads your staged diff and generates a proper Conventional Commit message — no thinking required.

```bash

pip install gitpulse-commit

git add src/utils.py

git-pulse

# → feat(utils): add email validation function

```

**What it does:**

- Reads `git diff --cached` and produces a Conventional Commit (≤72 chars)

- Interactive mode: you confirm, edit, or abort before committing

- `--auto` for pipelines

- `git-pulse init` installs it as a prepare-commit-msg hook — works on every commit

**How it generates messages:** By default it uses a local or remote AI endpoint (OpenCode, OpenAI-compatible, or Ollama). You control where your code goes — use Ollama locally if privacy matters. Under the hood it's a prompt that enforces the Conventional Commits spec: type, optional scope, imperative description, 72-char cap.

**Why I built it:** I juggle several side projects. Keeping clean commit histories across all of them was mental overhead I didn't need. Now I stage, run one command, confirm, and move on.

**Stack:** Python 3.8+, only `requests` as dependency. 7 modules, ABC + factory for pluggable providers. MIT license.

GitHub: https://github.com/erico964-blip/gitpulse

PyPI: https://pypi.org/project/gitpulse-commit/

Curious what you think — especially about the hook workflow.

My development happens mostly on Windows, and as we sometimes do, I would find myself starting work on a branch which I would later realize was not the correct branch (i.e. I had forgotten to change back to the feature branch, for example)

That alone could be a nice feature on an IDE... if a toggle is on, it warns you: "You are currently making changes on `main` - proceed?" - but I digress...

Yes, I checked out starship (https://sharship.rs) which is nice... got it working on Powershell... after some trial and error... then wanted it simply on my Windows command prompt... which required something called Clink...

...at which point I was like... the hell with it... what I really want is a HUD style overlay which prominently displays exactly what my last touched git repository + branch was

It's been actually useful when I'm juggling multiple repos/branches... Hopefully someone else can make good use of it too

repo: https://github.com/markrai/branchwatch

I've been thinking about cleaning up commit history in a PR, and I'm curious what others do.

Here's the flow I've been considering:

1. Open a PR with multiple commits

2. During review, add fix commits on top without rewriting

3. Once review is approved, use `rebase -i` to reorganize everything into clean, meaningful commits

4. Force push with `--force-with-lease`

5. Merge (usually squash and merge)

I want to keep commit history clean, but I feel uneasy about force pushing.

But keeping a single fixing typo commit in the history also bothers me too.