I'm a happy GitHub user, these things I'd miss from pure git:
- Search (across code, issues, pull requests etc)
- Issue tracker (~ manage my backlog, write down potential ideas)
- Pull requests, review UI around them
- GitHub Apps and Actions (~ automation) and integration with third-party tools (auto-deploy changes to zeit.co / netlify / heroku etc).
- Security audits (GitHub can send pull requests to bump my dependencies when security vulns are discovered in them)
- Ability to contribute without having to fork/clone/push changes (I quite often contribute to projects by editing the code directly through the GitHub website).
> (I quite often contribute to projects by editing the code directly through the GitHub website)
Whenever I do that I get as far as the commit message and, lacking vi and a 72 char marker, commit 'wip', pull down the changes, amend the commit, and wish I'd done the whole thing locally faster and more easily in the first place.
I've never the GitHub editor/UI to submit non-trivial changes which require more than a few words to describe. I do not need vi to write "Fix a typo in the documentation".
Is it you or the project owners who care about the 72 character limit? IME most projects will accept contributions regardless of formatting of the commit message. Most people are just happy about contributions, regardless of source.
- Search (across code, issues, pull requests etc)
- Issue tracker (~ manage my backlog, write down potential ideas)
- Pull requests, review UI around them
- GitHub Apps and Actions (~ automation) and integration with third-party tools (auto-deploy changes to zeit.co / netlify / heroku etc).
- Security audits (GitHub can send pull requests to bump my dependencies when security vulns are discovered in them)
- Ability to contribute without having to fork/clone/push changes (I quite often contribute to projects by editing the code directly through the GitHub website).