Looking good! Ambitious project. I like that it's built on web technologies (Vue, Electron) but that might be a negative for the HN crowd. I think the hackability and extensibility could be an advantage of this stack than a native app.
Interesting design choices, like keeping config and log file in .git/.quill folder; handling work in progress using branches; resetting unmerged files on conflict; and not automatically watching files for changes.
Me personally I already have a Git workflow with mostly CLI and occasional GUI. Used to love Fork (closed source, paid, Mac and Windows only). Now using GittyUp (open source, C++, Linux/Mac/Win).
+1. So many cool desktop app ideas showing up in HN every now and then, yet most of them Electron-based web stuff that just feels horrible. At least Qt would be a lot more appreciated. So much missed potential
It's clearly a matter of taste. I, on the other hand, can't stand Qt or apps that try to look "native" in general. At least on Windows, it feels like going back to the previous century. The modern look, known from websites, is the only one that works for me, hence I use Electron. This way I also have full control over the UI and it looks the same on every OS.
> I, on the other hand, can't stand Qt or apps that try to look "native" in general.
100%. That's why I said "at least" and it's the feeling I have with Electron too. Electron apps (nor Qt ones) do not really feel native, and in that case, better to either go full native (so it doesn't feel like an imperfect approximation) or just deliver a web app that you can use on a browser?
The in-between ends up in a gray area that never feels quite right. But I agree it is in part a matter of style and expectations.
Though I also agree the Win32 look is terrible and outdated. GTK and Cocoa on Linux and macOS are really great and good looking native technologies. I've seen more and more projects target GTK on Windows instead of Win32 for this reason.
I feel comfortable with web technologies, and a large part of this project was using Monaco Editor as a powerful diff viewer, so I'll stay with my current stack. I'd be happy to make a pure web app, but I don't think it's possible with something like a Git client, since it needs to call system commands. Maybe there are some hacks available for local apps, but why would that be better than just using Electron. Yeah, it takes some space, but what is this compared to, for example, any modern computer game.
Can you explain why? I feel like more people are familiar with web technology and from my own subjective experience it's much simpler than qt for example
It depends from which point of view you are talking about.
A lot of people are familiar with web technologies, therefore using something like Electron is way easier for them. That makes a lot of sense.
However, from an end user point of view, Electron (while potentially easier to developer with for a large pool of developers) doesn't feel native. You can tell you are running a web app inside that doesn't obey the OS conventions, the standardised OS shortcuts, looks different than the rest, etc. It's like it doesn't quite match and all the muscle memory you have for working with other native apps (mainly for keyword-heavy users like myself) just doesn't work, making it a frustrating experience. Plus many (not all!) Electron apps are super heavy weight and feel slow when you contrast them with other truly native apps.
Overall, I think you will see a lot of people that don't really mind Electron, but many do. I think it largely comes down to whether you want to develop a desktop app faster yourself, or deliver a desktop app that would satisfy almost every user out there (which might be harder to build).
And BTW, this is coming from somebody that worked a LOT with Electron, as the original author of Etcher (https://github.com/balena-io/etcher), plus I led the Desktop Team at Postman (https://www.postman.com, which is arguable one of the worst Electron apps out there, mostly due to really bad early architecture/business decisions) for a while. I tried everything but I gave up on it. It can never even be a good enough approximation to a native experience that many users expect.
In any case, great job with GitQuill. It does look pretty cool and I wish it was a native app!
Developing apps with Qt and QML is super easy these days. I wrote a post about my experience[1]. QML is such a joy to program the UI in, and then you can use a compiled language–C++/Rust/etc for amazing performance gains. Also, most Qt Quick components (those exposed via QML) are written in C++, so using these native components means that even working with these abstractions is very performant.
Yes please. I've been meaning to make a GitKraken alternative. It's a good concept but GK has always been extremely bulky and expensive for what it does.
I've been using Gitbutler which is also opensource
- https://github.com/gitbutlerapp/gitbutler
- https://gitbutler.com/
Interesting. I've been missing `svn changelist` feature in Git. GitButler calls it virtual branches. Indispensable feature. Going to try it out.
Looking good! Ambitious project. I like that it's built on web technologies (Vue, Electron) but that might be a negative for the HN crowd. I think the hackability and extensibility could be an advantage of this stack than a native app.
Interesting design choices, like keeping config and log file in .git/.quill folder; handling work in progress using branches; resetting unmerged files on conflict; and not automatically watching files for changes.
Me personally I already have a Git workflow with mostly CLI and occasional GUI. Used to love Fork (closed source, paid, Mac and Windows only). Now using GittyUp (open source, C++, Linux/Mac/Win).
https://fork.dev/
https://github.com/Murmele/Gittyup
Electron is a show-stopper for me.
+1. So many cool desktop app ideas showing up in HN every now and then, yet most of them Electron-based web stuff that just feels horrible. At least Qt would be a lot more appreciated. So much missed potential
It's clearly a matter of taste. I, on the other hand, can't stand Qt or apps that try to look "native" in general. At least on Windows, it feels like going back to the previous century. The modern look, known from websites, is the only one that works for me, hence I use Electron. This way I also have full control over the UI and it looks the same on every OS.
> I, on the other hand, can't stand Qt or apps that try to look "native" in general.
100%. That's why I said "at least" and it's the feeling I have with Electron too. Electron apps (nor Qt ones) do not really feel native, and in that case, better to either go full native (so it doesn't feel like an imperfect approximation) or just deliver a web app that you can use on a browser?
The in-between ends up in a gray area that never feels quite right. But I agree it is in part a matter of style and expectations.
Though I also agree the Win32 look is terrible and outdated. GTK and Cocoa on Linux and macOS are really great and good looking native technologies. I've seen more and more projects target GTK on Windows instead of Win32 for this reason.
I feel comfortable with web technologies, and a large part of this project was using Monaco Editor as a powerful diff viewer, so I'll stay with my current stack. I'd be happy to make a pure web app, but I don't think it's possible with something like a Git client, since it needs to call system commands. Maybe there are some hacks available for local apps, but why would that be better than just using Electron. Yeah, it takes some space, but what is this compared to, for example, any modern computer game.
Can you explain why? I feel like more people are familiar with web technology and from my own subjective experience it's much simpler than qt for example
It depends from which point of view you are talking about.
A lot of people are familiar with web technologies, therefore using something like Electron is way easier for them. That makes a lot of sense.
However, from an end user point of view, Electron (while potentially easier to developer with for a large pool of developers) doesn't feel native. You can tell you are running a web app inside that doesn't obey the OS conventions, the standardised OS shortcuts, looks different than the rest, etc. It's like it doesn't quite match and all the muscle memory you have for working with other native apps (mainly for keyword-heavy users like myself) just doesn't work, making it a frustrating experience. Plus many (not all!) Electron apps are super heavy weight and feel slow when you contrast them with other truly native apps.
Overall, I think you will see a lot of people that don't really mind Electron, but many do. I think it largely comes down to whether you want to develop a desktop app faster yourself, or deliver a desktop app that would satisfy almost every user out there (which might be harder to build).
And BTW, this is coming from somebody that worked a LOT with Electron, as the original author of Etcher (https://github.com/balena-io/etcher), plus I led the Desktop Team at Postman (https://www.postman.com, which is arguable one of the worst Electron apps out there, mostly due to really bad early architecture/business decisions) for a while. I tried everything but I gave up on it. It can never even be a good enough approximation to a native experience that many users expect.
In any case, great job with GitQuill. It does look pretty cool and I wish it was a native app!
Developing apps with Qt and QML is super easy these days. I wrote a post about my experience[1]. QML is such a joy to program the UI in, and then you can use a compiled language–C++/Rust/etc for amazing performance gains. Also, most Qt Quick components (those exposed via QML) are written in C++, so using these native components means that even working with these abstractions is very performant.
[1] https://rubymamistvalove.com/block-editor
Looks really nice. For me, GitKraken is the gold standard and my go to app for Git workflows. I'd love to contribute to this.
Yes please. I've been meaning to make a GitKraken alternative. It's a good concept but GK has always been extremely bulky and expensive for what it does.