The one thing I don't like about GitHub for Windows (and GitHub in general) is its lack of a graphical view of your branches. I've found that a DAG view is indispensible for understanding the mechanics of branching and merging, and even now that I'm using the command line much more than I used to, I still find I make extensive use of it.
I sometimes wonder if not displaying a DAG view is an attempt to make Git seem more accessible to Subversion and TFS users, who are only used to a linear concept of source history. (Microsoft's Git client in Visual Studio 2013 is another one that does the same thing.) The problem is that it's misleading, because it shows changesets as being related to each other when in actual fact they aren't.
Comments
The one thing I don't like about GitHub for Windows (and GitHub in general) is its lack of a graphical view of your branches. I've found that a DAG view is indispensible for understanding the mechanics of branching and merging, and even now that I'm using the command line much more than I used to, I still find I make extensive use of it.
I sometimes wonder if not displaying a DAG view is an attempt to make Git seem more accessible to Subversion and TFS users, who are only used to a linear concept of source history. (Microsoft's Git client in Visual Studio 2013 is another one that does the same thing.) The problem is that it's misleading, because it shows changesets as being related to each other when in actual fact they aren't.