Git Graph to see all commits across all branches

[isaiahdahl]

Just moved our team from bitbucket to Github. I've got to say the feature I am missing most is this commit's view.

I could look at the commits across all branches and see a Git Graph about where everything was at.

Even if there isn't a git graph, I would find it very useful to have All Branches as an option here.

[Katsute]

Maybe check out the Insights > Network tab on your repository

[isaiahdahl]

Not available on Private Repos. Also not really what I'm looking for. The graph is actually less important, having a place to list "All Commits" is more what I think is missing for me.

[nathabonfim59]

For anyone searching for this feature, you can access the "Activity" section. It's available even for private repositories. You'll find it in the sidebar, right after the "Readme" icon.

[gnowland]

But there's no branch "subway map", or am I missing something?

[BinToss]

But there's no branch "subway map", or am I missing something?

The Network graph is a bit better, but isn't as good as Le Git Graph, unless you want to compare forks.

[araujorayza]

But there's no branch "subway map", or am I missing something?

The Network graph is a bit better, but isn't as good as Le Git Graph, unless you want to compare forks.

I don't see a graph, It's basically a list. Do I need to do something else to show it?

[carun]

I just moved from Bitbucket to GitHub and I miss this dearly. We need the ability to view all the branches (as labels) and their commits as graph. Equivalent git command: git log --graph --oneline --all

[NirmalScaria]

You could use Le Git Graph, a browser extension that does exactly this.

Install the extension from here : https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/le-git-graph-commits-grap/joggkdfebigddmaagckekihhfncdobff

It will add a new "commits" section to every GitHub repo you open. Open the commits graph and there, all commits across branches will be listed along with the git graph.

Hope it helps!

[carun]

Hey @NirmalScaria this is fantastic. There appears to be some bugs. I'll email you the details.

[m0han-suresh]

How secure is this? Browser extensions can steal data if they want isit?

[NirmalScaria]

@m0han-suresh  Hey, I am the developer of this extension. I would like to clarify on that. Browser extensions are always open source. (Some might obfuscate, but there is really no way to properly compile anything). And I have made sure this extension is open source and not obfuscated at all. Anyone can see the source code and it does not collect any data.

One possible attack surface is the OAuth workflow. And technically, I admit, it is possible to steal data for the app owner if you use OAuth for login. But, if you are working as part of an organisation or anything serious at all, you have the option to use a PAT that you could generate manually. There will be no way for anyone to steal any data. The instructions are there in the github readme of the extension source code.

Thank you.

[vornde01]

The chrome extention looks great, but it's blocked at my company.

[13steinj]

Similarly, doesn't run on enterprise instances, and uses firebase functions which means it phones home in some regard.

[NirmalScaria]

@13steinj Hey, the firebase functions call is mainly for setting up OAuth. It was unavoidable to have some server running on the backend and being called from the extension for the authentication to work. (And the only other thing that calls the server is for usage statistics, and doesn't take any information.).
.
About the problem with enterprise instances, I am really not aware with the issue. It would be helpful if you could file it as an issue in the repo with details.

[13steinj]

About the problem with enterprise instances, I am really not aware with the issue. It would be helpful if you could file it as an issue in the repo with details.

It just quite literally doesn't load on any site that isn't github.com. It only connects, to github.com. Enterprise instances exist on separate domains. See refined-github for what they do to handle this (and authentication)-- they go the PAT route and support arbitrary domains.

Assuming I'm just missing something and it can load on enterprise instances-- going the PAT route, and having some way to disable statistics (with optional extension permissions of some sort) would go a long way. For enterprise instances, if the extension hits "anything except the domain of the site it's on", organizations would be hesitant to enable / allow this.

[MarkDaoust]

@NirmalScaria Awsome.

Any chance you can make it work for the "commits" tab on PRs too?

[NirmalScaria]

I didn't quite get it. Could you elaborate in a little more detail for what is expected? Perhaps file it as a new issue in the repo?

[MarkDaoust]

NirmalScaria/le-git-graph#43

Thanks!

[brunomjm]

This feature is dearly missed in my company as well after migrating to GitHub Enterprise from Bitbucket...

[kizzie]

I miss this from bitbucket so much!

[yoshida-yuen-ijs]

I'd like this feature too. It's not very user-friendly that the graphs can't be viewed.

[andrea-masciotta-idsg]

Such a useful feature, missing it too after migration from BitBucket!

[David-Kyrat]

still no update on something that can run on company laptops ?

[gma]

I've had the command carun mentioned above setup as an alias for years. I just type git graph. It's my standard way of interacting with history.

For those unfamiliar, you can create an alias with git config, like this:

git config --global alias.graph "log --oneline --graph --all"

# to run it from within a repo...
git graph

It'll add the alias to your user's config (e.g. in the ~/.gitconfig file).

I think the Commits page is a bit of a waste of space. I'd been using GitHub well over a decade before I noticed that it doesn't sort the list of commits according to their ancestry in the repository.

It sorts them by timestamp. If you swap your two most recent commits (A and B) around locally (e.g. with git rebase -i) and push, their timestamps won't change. So locally you might have commit A (made first) at the HEAD of the branch, but the Commits page will still order them by timestamp (showing B above A).

That's not what I think most of us would expect. I expect it to behave more like an online version of git log.

I never bother with the list of commits on the web, and stick to local tools. Mainly the git cli.