> and because it's the command line good luck getting a visual representation of what you're committing
I don't get the point here. I've never met a developer who knew about `git commit` but didn't know about `git diff` (sometimes I pointed out `git diff --cached`).
I don't think you can blame the CLI on this. It's about the lack of proofreading, in my opinion.
I'm exaggerating a bit of course, but the point still stands. Git diff and git status even with color are practically impossible to read and understand past a couple changes, and if it's across multiple files and code being re-arranged it's hell. And getting a junior to wire up a GUI diff tool to display and show those items? Impossible. Also, getting juniors to commit parts of a file or only a subset of them? Again, impossible.
Maybe you work with a higher/better caliber of juniors than I do. At this point, I'm seriously contemplating being a mean dictator and forbidding commits outside of a dedicated GUI until they can prove their adeptness at using the CLI, which they should learn on their own time.
I don't get the point here. I've never met a developer who knew about `git commit` but didn't know about `git diff` (sometimes I pointed out `git diff --cached`).
I don't think you can blame the CLI on this. It's about the lack of proofreading, in my opinion.