The git history command deserves more attention
Working with lots of changes in parallel on git can be painful. You end up juggling branches and commits, and running scary commands that can leave your tree in a half-broken state if you so much as sneeze. , an alternative to , gets discussed a lot these days ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ) and is often pitched as a solution. While I’m very sold on the problems is trying to solve, the way it solves them hasn’t quite hit home with me. Every 3 months, for the last 1.5 years, I try it out for a few days, really trying to make it part of my workflow but eventually I give up and go back to git. 1 That’s where comes in. It’s an experimental command that arrived across two releases, 2.54 (April, and subcommands) and 2.55 (June, subcommand). It got a flurry of attention on each release day, and then, as far as I can tell, not much community discussion since. Which is a shame, because IMO it already delivers several of the benefits people tout for without needing to switch your whole workflow. And the cool thing is that it’s part of the core git distribution, so you can try it without installing anything.