git-cli-tools VS git-absorb

I use IntelliJ IDEA and often rely on their own Git functionality. But it cannot stage specific lines, only whole chunks [1]. For that, I've been using lazygit for a couple of months now. I like its simple UI and that it makes staging specific lines very easy and quick. If you like lazygit, you might also be interested in similar Git CLI clients that I collected here [2].

[1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-186988/Allow-commi...

[2] https://github.com/frontaid/git-cli-tools#clients

Very useful tool! I just added it to https://github.com/frontaid/git-cli-tools

bit (https://github.com/chriswalz/bit) is a somewhat similar CLI tool for this. It shows command completion alongside a description.

PS: We maintain a list of helpful Git CLI tools on https://github.com/frontaid/git-cli-tools

There is also https://github.com/frontaid/git-cli-tools which is categorized and has more tools.

Nice, no need to look up past commits ! Didn't know about this, I had to look it up.

It's a separate project from git [0].

[0]: https://github.com/tummychow/git-absorb

Boy have I got the thing for you. git absorb - https://github.com/tummychow/git-absorb

The way to work with it is:

    git add file1

You can also manage via a holistic UI: - Bisection - Log and reflog, stashes - subtrees, submodules - certain third party subcommands like git-absorb, and extend it with your own - interact with issues and pull requests via forge - pretty much all of the hundreds of CLI flags via a modal UI that got generalized and extracted to a lib called transient - well-integrated diff and conflict resolution (which is mostly just smerge) - the rebase/cherry-pick workflows I liked the best, including support for --update-refs - at any time you can always press a key to see the raw commands and output that it's using, which taught me a ton of corner cases - IMO it has a great manual

I sometimes use git-absorb to help me if I made a tonne of changes, and can't be arsed to manually make the fixups

If done well, your git history carries the information of your process in a very similar way.

You have to be somewhere in the middle, so I'd say to do a semantic rebase at last step before merge. A fantastic tool that is not so well-known is git-absorb, which helps a lot doing that cleanly and automatically.

https://github.com/tummychow/git-absorb

Squash merge is like a sledge hammer, interactive rebase + git reset -N HEAD^ + git-absorb + git add -p (or even better, Magit) are surgical tools.