Github export: instead of pushing to 'glitch' branch, use the project name?

I’m interested in using Glitch to create PRs for review in github.

As is, the github export feature always exports to the glitch branch, so it’s difficult to create multiple open PRs at once. It’d be nice to leverage the remix project feature and have each project push to its own branch, which could be the name of the project so no extra work for the user. :slight_smile:

Great Idea! This would totaly make exporting so mutch easier!
:tada:

I don’t know if folks want to discuss how they develop code but I would generally recommend against doing it in Glitch directly. The editor is okay but it will never rival say VS Code. All I do these days is pull my projects from GitHub into Glitch, I never push.

Imagine having several branches of code how could they all run on Glitch simultaneously.

Also a huge fan of VS Code! I’m thinking of using Glitch in an instructional setting where zero setup would be valuable, but I would still like to be able to run code reviews to provide feedback.

Hi Raymond. I see what you mean if you’re using it as a teaching tool. I think setting a branch would be a useful addition.

The only small wrinkle I see to using the project name is that the project name can be changed. Would it then push to a new branch?

Good question! I imagine that could work, doesn’t seem like it would always need to be the same branch.

I believe I would like to see the branch name be an option with glitch branch being a default if none is specified and the one specified being saved when entered. Seemingly that would permit a developer to push to “any branch any time for any purpose”. I know I have had to save projects in various states, locally I copy the project folder. This is often due to “I’m going to make a small change” that starts to get bigger and bigger and now I’m worried about all the changes at one time

It would be nice to push the changes to another branch and restore the project from the original one.

As I mentioned I only pull into Glitch and that always comes from main. It could be useful to branch a release off of main in some cases. Large commercial projects (in some cases) need to be able to apply patches to running system and there isn’t always time to futz with main.

I have tried VS code and I perfer Glitch. The editors are way different but when I have to work on my chromebook and I can not use VS code I will use glitch. Being able to push to different branches ex: Pre-Release instead of Glitch Would help so mutch!

Interesting. I think your preference may be influenced by the kind of projects you write.

VS Code is overwhelmingly popular. With features like syntax highlighting, Intellisense, global search and replace. Rename a module and it locates and changes all the requires, support for testing frameworks, etc. I use an extension for accessing my database, one for testing APIs (like Postman). View file differences, a debugger, live share, split screens I doubt I have ever seen any editor quite as cool.

And of course :slight_smile: I can pull and push from any branch.

Yes. For a basic school project I will use glitch. If it is a personal project I will use VS or glitch. One of my profesional projects (Ulink) was developed on glitch. Some of my personal projects (Ex: My archives was developed on glitch). I have used https://repl.it for testing & Developing. My first site on glitch was a simple map ( from https://mapbox.com) And they recomended glitch as the code editor.

My archives (Sort of like an escape room)

Ulink (Bio link generator)