Git Extensions Reviews

User Ratings

4.7 out of 5 stars

★★★★★

★★★★

★★★

★★

★

ease 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 3 / 5

features 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 4 / 5

design 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 3 / 5

support 1 of 5 2 of 5 3 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 3 / 5

Rate This Project

Featured Reviews

Highest Rated

tl;dr: For those who don't want to read the rest of this review I tried five git clients for Windows and found Git Extensions much better than any of the others. I highly recommend it. Not having used git before I was looking for something with a GUI so I wouldn't have to remember all the commands and options. Git Extensions was one of five git clients I tried for Windows: Git for Windows (which has a basic GUI), TortoiseGit, GitHub Client for Windows, Source Tree (from Atlassian, the people behind BitBucket) and Git Extensions. The GUI for Git for Windows handled the basics but for anything more you have to drop into the command-line interface. I didn't like the workflow with TortoiseGit, which seemed to me to be trying to fit a square peg into a round hole: It seemed to be a port of a version control system (VCS) that deals with changes at a file level, such as SVN, and didn't really seem designed to deal with a VCS like git that deals with changes at a project level (with each commit being a snapshot of all files in the project). I came to the GitHub Client for Windows and Source Tree after having used Git Extensions for a year, just to try them out and see if they were an improvement on Git Extensions. The GitHub Client for Windows was too basic for me. While it could be used with repositories that weren't hosted on GitHub, it seemed to me the assumption was that many functions would be carried out on the GitHub website so that functionality was not included in the client. This would be fine for people who host their remote repositories on GitHub but I was looking for something to use at work, where the remote repositories are hosted on our local network. Source Tree is beautiful to look at, much more polished than Git Extensions, but I found it lacks some of the functionality of Git Extensions. It's in its early days so may be worth looking at in a year or two but, for the moment, Git Extensions is far more powerful. So that's what I didn't like about the other Git clients for Windows. What about Git Extensions? The developers claim that Git Extensions allows you to do everything via the GUI, that you never need to drop down into git's command-line interface (CLI). That's not entirely true but I only have to use the CLI about once a month or so, for really obscure and tricky stuff. I've been impressed with how much I can do with Git Extensions. The developers have done a really good job of packing so much functionality into the application, in a clear and understandable way. For an example, take a look at the Pull dialog box which includes diagrams of what the different merge options do. One thing I'm particularly impressed by is the way Git Extensions handles submodules. Submodules, I think, are a weakness in git (the "pure" git, with the CLI, not Git Extensions). Very finicky, with multiple steps to add a submodule and having to manually edit a configuration file to remove a submodule. Git Extensions combined the multiple steps needed to create a submodule into one, and handles removing a submodule simply, without the user having to edit any files manually. In short, Git Extensions does a good job of simplifying these tasks that are complex in "pure" git. I've mentioned that Source Tree looks more polished than Git Extensions. There is nothing majorly wrong with the look and feel of Git Extensions, it just looks like Atlassian has put more effort into the colour scheme and icons of Source Tree. Given that I found Git Extensions to be far more powerful than Source Tree I don't care about Git Extensions not looking as slick. The only quibble I have with Git Extensions, and it's a minor one, is that the documentation is a little lacking. It covers the basic functionality fine but doesn't explain all the options available in each command, and what their effects are. Now that I'm reasonably experienced and trying to do more with Git Extensions, I find I have to go to the "pure" git documentation to find out about options for different commands as the Git Extensions documentation doesn't cover it. Luckily the designers of Git Extensions have mapped the underlying git commands to their dialog boxes in a logical way, so usually I can work out which git option maps to which option in a Git Extensions dialog box.

Lowest Rated

Very buggy software. Inability to support SSH on non-default (non 22) ports even after the issue has been open for a year. The latest version (May 15, 2015) won't even install (permissions error, even when running on Administrator account with UAC disabled) Half the time it can't push to the repository because pageant doesn't start. It stores some settings in the registry, such as the locations of the putty-related executables, and does not honor or even read them correctly. Git is a pain enough as it is, a client should alleviate some of that pain but this thing is just too buggy and unstable to be useful. Uninstalled and went with SourceTree, which actually works properly.

User Reviews

Filter Reviews:

All

slumbering Posted 2019-10-21

Maybe not the sexiest one but definitely the most powerfull.
russkieaus Posted 2019-09-09

The best git UI tool for Windows
bitmakerneo Posted 2019-04-30

Unusable! Uncomfortable/ugly UI !
glide3 Posted 2018-08-29

It might not look flashy like SourceTree, or GitKraken, but its just so much faster (due to the UI being simple), and hence its also stable. Love this project.
alexander7k Posted 2018-07-13

Все очень нравится
fott25 Posted 2016-12-02

Best Git tool ever, makes many things in Git much easier
leocognimade Posted 2016-09-30

It doesn't work with my NAS Git remote repository using SSH plain login.
chris54 Posted 2015-07-14

Simply the best graphical front-end for Git out there, hands down. Not without issues, workflow could be just a little less cumbersome here and there, full refresh of the history graph for every little operation is a bit annoying etc. But ofall Git front-ends I've evaluated (and I tried pretty much all of the major ones), this one strikes by far the best balance between features and simplicity, power and ease of use. What I like most about Git Extensions is that while it makes working with Git easier, it doesn't try to hide its complexity too much. This is a great help for beginners to learn to understand what's going on. Helped me a lot within in my company to "evangelize" developers away from Subversion.

2 users found this review helpful.
rvaidya Posted 2015-06-17

I have used many other git GUIs (SourceTree, SmartGit) and GitExtensions is vastly superior. It has some trouble dealing with large binary files (have to go to command line for this) but for all the micro operations you have to do when merging, GitExtensions gives you power unparalleled by any other UI. One of the reasons I dislike developing on a Mac is because I don't have GitExtensions there and am forced to use SourceTree. Easy to use, powerful, UI centered around the branching tree, and frequently updated.

1 user found this review helpful.
arawn-annwn Posted 2015-05-21

"Git Extensions is the only graphical user interface for Git that allows you to control Git without using the command line." I have no idea this may have been true in the past, but I know of several alternatives so this is not currently true.
piroxilin Posted 2015-05-20

The most convenient git frontend.
dakamuda Posted 2015-05-16

Very buggy software. Inability to support SSH on non-default (non 22) ports even after the issue has been open for a year. The latest version (May 15, 2015) won't even install (permissions error, even when running on Administrator account with UAC disabled) Half the time it can't push to the repository because pageant doesn't start. It stores some settings in the registry, such as the locations of the putty-related executables, and does not honor or even read them correctly. Git is a pain enough as it is, a client should alleviate some of that pain but this thing is just too buggy and unstable to be useful. Uninstalled and went with SourceTree, which actually works properly.

1 user found this review helpful.
cniweb Posted 2015-01-02

Great Project, Thanks!
johanvanr Posted 2014-12-23

This GUI severely lowers the threshold for newcomers to Git, especially for people (like me) who easily get overwhelmed with the syntaxes of multiple programming languages and other "systems" that govern our everyday working life, along with the engineering, math and all stuff that comes along with it. However, still, it also pays off to know a bit about Git "bash" commands.

1 user found this review helpful.
pramodj Posted 2014-10-15

Support every required functionality via GUI. Incredibly lightweight. Best of all, it integrates with context menu and visual studio (at-least toolbar) which makes it better than source tree. Makes you no need to use git bash again.
tracker1 Posted 2014-09-05

Compared with the other tools for this, it's 5+ ...
akozlowski Posted 2014-06-12

Love this project!

1 user found this review helpful.
alexbereznikov Posted 2014-05-30

Just the best tool for git.

1 user found this review helpful.
espyo Posted 2014-03-07

It's so useful to have this when using Visual Studio!... It does everything I need, and has a nice interface.

1 user found this review helpful.
simong2013 Posted 2014-01-15

tl;dr: For those who don't want to read the rest of this review I tried five git clients for Windows and found Git Extensions much better than any of the others. I highly recommend it. Not having used git before I was looking for something with a GUI so I wouldn't have to remember all the commands and options. Git Extensions was one of five git clients I tried for Windows: Git for Windows (which has a basic GUI), TortoiseGit, GitHub Client for Windows, Source Tree (from Atlassian, the people behind BitBucket) and Git Extensions. The GUI for Git for Windows handled the basics but for anything more you have to drop into the command-line interface. I didn't like the workflow with TortoiseGit, which seemed to me to be trying to fit a square peg into a round hole: It seemed to be a port of a version control system (VCS) that deals with changes at a file level, such as SVN, and didn't really seem designed to deal with a VCS like git that deals with changes at a project level (with each commit being a snapshot of all files in the project). I came to the GitHub Client for Windows and Source Tree after having used Git Extensions for a year, just to try them out and see if they were an improvement on Git Extensions. The GitHub Client for Windows was too basic for me. While it could be used with repositories that weren't hosted on GitHub, it seemed to me the assumption was that many functions would be carried out on the GitHub website so that functionality was not included in the client. This would be fine for people who host their remote repositories on GitHub but I was looking for something to use at work, where the remote repositories are hosted on our local network. Source Tree is beautiful to look at, much more polished than Git Extensions, but I found it lacks some of the functionality of Git Extensions. It's in its early days so may be worth looking at in a year or two but, for the moment, Git Extensions is far more powerful. So that's what I didn't like about the other Git clients for Windows. What about Git Extensions? The developers claim that Git Extensions allows you to do everything via the GUI, that you never need to drop down into git's command-line interface (CLI). That's not entirely true but I only have to use the CLI about once a month or so, for really obscure and tricky stuff. I've been impressed with how much I can do with Git Extensions. The developers have done a really good job of packing so much functionality into the application, in a clear and understandable way. For an example, take a look at the Pull dialog box which includes diagrams of what the different merge options do. One thing I'm particularly impressed by is the way Git Extensions handles submodules. Submodules, I think, are a weakness in git (the "pure" git, with the CLI, not Git Extensions). Very finicky, with multiple steps to add a submodule and having to manually edit a configuration file to remove a submodule. Git Extensions combined the multiple steps needed to create a submodule into one, and handles removing a submodule simply, without the user having to edit any files manually. In short, Git Extensions does a good job of simplifying these tasks that are complex in "pure" git. I've mentioned that Source Tree looks more polished than Git Extensions. There is nothing majorly wrong with the look and feel of Git Extensions, it just looks like Atlassian has put more effort into the colour scheme and icons of Source Tree. Given that I found Git Extensions to be far more powerful than Source Tree I don't care about Git Extensions not looking as slick. The only quibble I have with Git Extensions, and it's a minor one, is that the documentation is a little lacking. It covers the basic functionality fine but doesn't explain all the options available in each command, and what their effects are. Now that I'm reasonably experienced and trying to do more with Git Extensions, I find I have to go to the "pure" git documentation to find out about options for different commands as the Git Extensions documentation doesn't cover it. Luckily the designers of Git Extensions have mapped the underlying git commands to their dialog boxes in a logical way, so usually I can work out which git option maps to which option in a Git Extensions dialog box.

2 users found this review helpful.
aegon522 Posted 2013-11-08

The closest I've found so far to "TortoiseHg for Git" (which is by far the best GUI client for any DVCS I've seen). Which is ironic, given that there is a "TortoiseGit" (which I am not very fond of). Compared to TortoiseHg, Git Extensions could use some polish though to make the GUI more ergonomic to get on par with TortoiseHg (it's mostly minor things like borders and colors - yes, such things do matter), but overall I am quite fond of it.

1 user found this review helpful.
vitalikklichko Posted 2013-05-13

It saves my time. highly recommended
a11922256 Posted 2012-12-18

Good and useful software
sculesbate1976 Posted 2012-10-29

Cool software!
anenecen1982 Posted 2012-10-29

Two words: LIGHTNING FAST!

Show next 25 reviews >