logoalt Hacker News

saghm • yesterday at 3:33 PM • 6 replies • view on HN

I feel like git operations are one of the few things that I truly don't care at all about whether someone uses an LLM for and doesn't tell me. PR descriptions and commit messages should be written by humans for humans, but like, if someone doesn't know how to manually configure their git remotes and what exact command to use to amend/squash their commits into the shape needed and instead has an agent prepare all that and use the GitHub CLI to open the PR, why should I care? Beyond the code itself, I care about the things that will continue existing in the long run fitting my team's conventions (the number of commits, the commit messages, the PR description and comments, and then whether there's a merge commit at the end), but the process used to create those things doesn't matter to me.


Replies

SamuelAdams • today at 12:00 AM

Omzsh user checking in, I always stumble a little in interviews about this because they usually have a default git configured and commands like gco -b and gp don’t work, and I have to think about it for a second.

syshyk • yesterday at 3:51 PM

Wasn't this a think before_ai? Enough people are using IDEs which handle this for them. I still have to check a few commands now and then.

Though ideally interviewers should appreciate this - unless its a hard requirement you do it by hand day to day - the rest of us can look this up quick enough.

➕ show 1 reply
astonex • yesterday at 3:42 PM

> but like, if someone doesn't know how to manually configure their git remotes and what exact command to use to amend/squash their commits into the shape needed and instead has an agent prepare all that and use the GitHub CLI to open the PR, why should I care?

Because LLMs aren't a reason to not learn your tools. A determinist CLI command vs using a statistical machine for it. It's just a waste of tokens at the very least.

➕ show 5 replies
ctkhn • yesterday at 9:07 PM

I had a coworker a few years ago who was very stuck up and the first place I saw it was his opinions how people should use git. I use the terminal for some stuff and the gui for others, but he was weirdly judgemental about doing anything other than full terminal.

philpem • yesterday at 4:33 PM

That's pretty much where I'm at, so long as they're not filling the code with "///CLAUDE ADDITION" type guards (ie noise).

Personally I ask the LLM to summarise what the commit does and explain it to me, make sure I understand it, then review the PR. I'm getting half the speed the High Speed Sloperators are getting but I was the only person submitting PRs the other day when the LLM service was down.

For nasty multi-way git merges and rebases, it's been a game changer. And of course that's reviewable by doing a delta on the final rebase branch vs. the original branch.

With all that said... having to use LLMs at work is making me want to use them less on my own projects.

➕ show 2 replies
nunez • yesterday at 8:36 PM

what happens when there's a massive merge conflict that requires human review?

Git is an essential tool; not knowing how a key tool works is dangerous IMO

➕ show 5 replies