Comment by embedding-shape

2 months ago

Are any of them integrated with git? AFAIK, you'd have to instruct them to use git for you if you don't want to do it manually.

Imagine a GUI built around git branches + agents working in those branches + tooling to manage the orchestration and small review points, rather than "here's a chat and tool calling, glhf".

3 comments

embedding-shape

Reply
KronisLV  2 months ago

> Are any of them integrated with git?

All of the models that can do tool calls are typically good enough to use Git.

Just this week I used both Claude Code and Codex to look at unstaged/staged changes and to review them multiple times, even do comparison between a feature branch and the main branch to identify why a particular feature might have broken in the feature branch.

  • embedding-shape  2 months ago

    > All of the models that can do tool calls are typically good enough to use Git.

    But again, it's the "user message > llm reason > llm tool call > tool response > llm reason > llm response" flow I think is inefficient and not good enough. It's a lazy solution built on top of the chat flow.

    What I imagined would exist by now would be something smarter, where you don't say "Ok, now please commit this" or whatever.

    I already have a tool for myself that launch Codex, Claude Code, Qwen Code(r?) and Gemini for each change I do, and automatically manage them into git branches, and lets me diff between what they do and so on.

    Yet I still think we haven't really figured out a good UX for this.