Git is so simple that you don't need a gui for the normal day-to-day stuff.
And if you are fighting with the complex stuff, you are probably doing it wrong. Then no GUI in the world can help you.
And if you are fighting with the complex stuff, you are probably doing it wrong. Then no GUI in the world can help you.
It really depends on what you mean by day-to-day operations.
If all you do is checkout code, create ephemeral branches that either get deleted or are merged into another low-traffic branch or are simply pushed to a remote git workflow system, sure you don't need a GUI for that.
But if you need to traverse branch history and compare changes and do three-way merges and audit changes and track logs to a specific file within a repo... You are far better off with a GUI.
Everyone who has to fix bugs and maintain software?
Once I worked with teams, I started encountering things like difficult merges, long-running divergent branches, etc. that make GUI useful.
If there are more people in the first category, it's only because anyone can start a solo repo but only a subset of people work on teams.
Either way, who cares? Use what is useful to you.
Throughout these comments is this weird assertion that other people are using the wrong tool unlike us enlightened HNers. It's like people get offended that others prefer other tools. As if it's like "What, is my cli git preference not good enough for them?!"
I'm low-key convinced that's what's actually going on in all these cross-examinations.