Integrate a Workbench like TortoiseHg

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I tried TortoiseGit for a little while because I would like to switch to a DCVS 
from SVN. For now I prefer TortoiseHg but I think Git is the best choice 
because the integration in Eclipse will be smoother.

What I really miss in TortoiseGit is the workbench provided by TortoiseHg, 
especially the stashing tools. I would have thought it is something common in 
every Tortoise* product ?.

I'm using release 1.7.3.0 of TortoiseGit on Windows 7, and I wanted to know if 
there is any plan on implementing that in the future. 

Thank you

Original issue reported on code.google.com by glatap...@gmail.com on 11 Oct 2011 at 7:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Actually, log dialog can do regular task, commit, push, fetch, ...

Personally, I think unified UI(workbench) break TortoiseXXX idea. 
TortoiseXXX as plugin and integrate to explorer.

Original comment by lzn...@gmail.com on 12 Oct 2011 at 7:23

[GoogleCodeExporter]

OK, sorry to hear about that.
Problem is, outside of Tortoise there is no real good UI (unified or not).

May be a fork from Tortoise would be a good idea then ? It's only a suggestion, 
as I couldn't (at least for now) get involved in such a project.

Original comment by glatap...@gmail.com on 12 Oct 2011 at 2:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

There is a "Stash List..." context menu item in tgit which, I think, is not 
shown by default.  You can make it visible via Shift+RightClick, or by making 
it a default shown option in the tgit options.  It lists all stashes in the 
repo, and you can right-click on any stash and get the full log-entry command 
selection.

So from there you can do anything with a stash you like -- merge, remove, etc.  
(I believe removing a stash is equivalent to deleting the /refs/stash for it, 
though I've never used it so I'm not sure; someone else feel free to correct me)

Original comment by Jake.Stine on 12 Oct 2011 at 6:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

OK, this is already something. But it is not really how I use stashes in THg.

What I miss is this nice UI where on the left you have a list of the 
modifications in your working copy, and on the right the modifications stored 
in the current stash.

And what is mostly useful is to be able to select a part of the modification of 
the file and transfer only that part to the stash (or vice versa). It is really 
like having multiple working copies, but sharing the same history.

Is there a way to that with TGit ?

Original comment by glatap...@gmail.com on 12 Oct 2011 at 7:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Multiple working copies, I think, can be done by simply branching.
Stashing in git is like, quick and dirty, put my changes away for a while, work 
on something else, then get them back.
If you leave them for a longer time, you better branch and then simply commit 
the change so you could name the pending changes. That way you can put away 
multiple working copies, and name them so you remember why those changes were 
there in the first place.
Thats how I'd do it anyway...

What do you mean by stashes anyway. HG doesnt seem to use this term. The HG 
equivalent to git stash is shelves, thats what I understand anyway. So you mean 
stash as it is known by git? Or something else?

Original comment by jopi...@gmail.com on 12 Oct 2011 at 9:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Ok, may be I do not use branches enough, but I'm working with hg over svn+ssh 
(or git over svn+ssh). It seems to me more complicated than stashing my work, 
since I cannot merge, only rebase.

Regarding multiple copies, it is not really the same : that would require 
copying everything. I suspect it not to be as efficient as the stashing.

And yes, I meant shelves in THg, but I thought it was more or less the same 
mechanism as stashes in TGit.

Original comment by glatap...@gmail.com on 13 Oct 2011 at 1:09

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You can selectively merge items from any stash using either tgit's Show Log or 
Stash List dialogs.  Simply right-click and invoke "compare with working copy" 
for each file you want to bring changes from.  You can merge changes 
line-by-line into your working copy, or select to use an entire file.

tgit cannot merge a file into the working copy directly from the context menu, 
afaik.  So it's always a two-three click process.  Adding such an option might 
be work a feature request if the tgit devs deem it useful (though honestly its 
something I do so rarely that I think it would just add extra clutter to an 
already lengthy context menu).

I have just tried to delete a stash using "Delete ref..." from the Stash List 
context menu and it didn't work.  tgit says "not a ref."  Therefore, I add here:

It would be nice if tgit had something to allow for the easy removal of old 
stashes, since stashes that I routinely pop fail to merge properly (requiring 
some resolution on my part), and end up getting left around in the stash stack. 
 My recommendation would be a "Delete" button on the Stash List dialog.

Original comment by Jake.Stine on 14 Oct 2011 at 8:18

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Addendum: git's own terminology is "drop" rather than "delete" for stashes, so 
perhaps a 'drop' button would be more cosmetically correct.  And it would also 
be nice if the context menu in Show Log could automatically add an entry for 
"Drop this stash" when the right-click target is a known stash ref.

Original comment by Jake.Stine on 14 Oct 2011 at 8:34

[GoogleCodeExporter]

We use mercurial instead of GIT purely because of how much more productive 
TortoiseHG is over TortoiseGIT. I like GIT and would love to see TortoiseGIT 
incclude a workbench. I understand the view that it is desired to be a context 
menu application, but the workbench increases productivity and ease of use 
considerably and should at least be seriously considered.

That said, in an ideal world there would be a 'cloud' based, Node.JS backed, 
workbench for accessing GIT commands which could be started, stopped and 
managed within TortoiseGIT!!

Original comment by iamanthr...@gmail.com on 9 Nov 2011 at 1:04

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sounds like you want GitExtensions.

Also, you are always welcome to program up a workbench and submit a patch :)

Original comment by pro-lo...@optusnet.com.au on 9 Nov 2011 at 3:25

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yeah GitExtensions is a passable GUI, but it still isn't as nice as TortoiseHG, 
I'm just not sure why the Tortoise projects aren't using the same code base, 
wouldn't it make sense to just combine all the tortoise projects together into 
one awesome Tortoise? Then I wouldn't have to install three different installs 
and I would get all the features I want!

And yes, I would love to work on a workbench if I ever get a slow period at 
work or at least the html5, jQuery, css3 side if someone could work on the git 
side, I don't really do command line stuff now I'm old.

Original comment by iamanthr...@gmail.com on 9 Nov 2011 at 4:24

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Of course it's always possible to deliver a patch for having the embryo of an 
integrated UI, but I think I won't do it because :
- I would use it for my work and my employer would not want me to spend time on 
that
- I have no particular knowledge on Windows development and would be really 
slowed down by the setting up of the dev environment, the build environment,... 
Not counting discovering TGit codebase which is, I'm pretty sure, gigantic.
- I didn't request a feature (or proposed a bounty for it), I just wanted to 
know if it was on the roadmap or not, to know which DVCS we would use.

And generally speaking speaking, it is quite blunt to answer something like 
"it's open source, do it yourself". This does not tempt me (and I guess a lot 
of people) to get involved in the project. Now, almost every people posting in 
forums knows about FLOSS, and it does not bring any value anymore (unlike in 
the 90s) to the thread.

Original comment by joel.sch...@dental-wings.com on 9 Nov 2011 at 3:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Git on windows in quite "new", and the GUI tools are still not great. I would 
suggest you make your decision of which DVCS you want to use on the actual DVCS 
and not on the GUI tools available for it. 

The merger of all the Tortoise clients is unlikely to happen since there are 
serious modifications made to each one needed to work with a specific VCS, and 
each VCS has their own unique workflow, thus each Tortoise client is quite 
different (other then sharing the overlay icons)

If people took "do it yourself :)" as blunt I apologise, I stuck a smiley face 
on there for a reason. As you know this project currently has ~2 active 
developers, and they spend most of their time squashing bugs. I'm not even 
aware of there being a roadmap.

Original comment by pro-lo...@optusnet.com.au on 10 Nov 2011 at 5:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

OK, maybe I was a bit too strong regarding the invitation to code. Sorry, I 
guess it was the straw that broke the camel's back... :)

But concerning the rest, it sounds like you consider Mercurial and Git really 
different. Even if the technologies behind can be really different, I rather 
find the workflow similar : double step commit (local commit + pull), stashes, 
private branches... When I look the operations available in TortoiseGit and in 
TortoiseHG, they are quite close.

Finally, if it is true there are only 2 active developers then I would like to 
congratulate them, since this is quite an achievement already.

Original comment by glatap...@gmail.com on 10 Nov 2011 at 2:04

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 28 Dec 2011 at 5:29

• Changed state: Hold

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Issue 1079 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 19 Feb 2012 at 12:03

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 12 Aug 2012 at 4:05

• Added labels: Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

i do not want to sound overly enthusiastic, but i'd consider tortoisegit _by 
far_ the best git client around, at least amongst the ones available for 
windows and linux platforms. imo this is true already for the tgit log view. 

we do not directly depend on the shell extension features, except to start the 
tgit log view of course. only little issues remain, like Issue1656 (log view 
has no way to dcommit).

to make clear what this message should add to the above discussion: alone 
porting the tgit log view to something which is available on windows and linux 
would be a big win. but - as i am no GUI programmer - i am rather unsure if 
such a sentence makes sense in terms of effort / feasibility.

and of course now is 2013, not 2011 when the issue was created :)

Original comment by rupert.t...@gmail.com on 7 May 2013 at 9:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Im watching this thread since 1 year or so and still waiting for a TortoiseGit 
Workbench... I think that would be a killer-feature in TortoiseGit.

Original comment by florian....@fnkr.net on 7 May 2013 at 4:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

TortoiseGit Workbench would definitively save the day!

Original comment by alonec...@gmail.com on 19 Jun 2013 at 7:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

+1 for a standalone window like SourceTree

Original comment by felix.na...@gmail.com on 2 Aug 2013 at 8:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I use TortoiseHg workbench every day, would love to see a git version as well.

Original comment by SamMackr...@gmail.com on 5 Sep 2013 at 9:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi, 

 Have been using TortoiseGit for two years, last month I had to use TortoiseHG. 
Now I am missing workbench, to the point of considering switching tools and/or 
versioning system.

 Workbench is a must have in TortaiseGit!

Original comment by raima...@gmail.com on 8 Jul 2014 at 3:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I switched to SourceTree (supports Git and Hg): http://www.sourcetreeapp.com

Original comment by florian....@fnkr.net on 8 Jul 2014 at 5:28