I’m trying to figure out which tool would be best for managing my GitHub repositories. There are several options available and I’m not sure which one to pick.
The main choices I’m considering:
Using hub as a git wrapper
Working with the github-gem library
Sticking with standard git commands
Each approach seems to have different benefits and drawbacks. I want to understand what advantages and disadvantages each tool offers when it comes to GitHub workflow. Which one do you think provides the best experience for typical GitHub operations like creating pull requests, managing issues, and repository interactions?
Any insights from your personal experience would be really helpful in making this decision.
After 4 years with GitHub repos, it depends on your dev environment and team setup. I stick with plain git + GitHub CLI (gh) instead of hub or github-gem. The gh tool is GitHub’s official CLI now and gets way better maintenance than hub. GitHub-gem is basically dead - no meaningful updates in forever. Hub was solid but gh beats it for functionality and reliability. Plain git + gh keeps your git knowledge clean while giving you modern GitHub integration. Commands like gh pr create and gh issue list feel more natural than hub overriding git commands. Plus your core git skills transfer perfectly if you switch to GitLab or other platforms. Steeper learning curve upfront, but you get more transferable knowledge.
I used to wrestle with this exact choice until I realized I was approaching it wrong.
The real issue isn’t picking the right GitHub tool - it’s that you’re still doing repo management manually when you could automate everything.
I manage dozens of repos across multiple projects, and switching between different CLI tools was eating up way too much time. Now I automate all the repetitive GitHub stuff.
Automated workflows for pull requests, issue management, and repo syncing save me hours every week. You can trigger actions on commits, schedule maintenance tasks, and automate responses to common repo events.
Best part? You’re not locked into learning another CLI tool that might get deprecated. You build flexible workflows that adapt as GitHub’s API evolves.
For repo management at scale, automation beats any individual tool. Check out what’s possible at https://latenode.com
i totally agree, plain git is the way to go at first. once ur comfy, u can try hub for its extra features, but it can be overwhelming in the beginning. simplicity is key when learning!
I’ve used all three approaches over the past few years, and each has its place depending on your workflow. I started with plain git commands - they work fine, but I switched to hub because the productivity gains are huge. Creating pull requests straight from the command line with hub pull-request beats switching to the browser every time. The repo cloning shortcuts are handy when you’re juggling multiple projects. However, hub does add some abstraction that can hide what’s actually happening with git underneath. The github-gem felt outdated when I tried it last year, as it seemed way less maintained than hub. I’d recommend mastering basic git first, then moving to hub once you’re comfortable with standard git operations. This way, you’ll understand what hub’s doing behind the scenes and can troubleshoot when things go wrong.
yeah, github-gem is basically dead - no point wasting time on it. hub vs git really depends on ur own workflow. if ur all about creating PRs and managing issues from the terminal, hub’s totally worth it. but if u wanna learn the basics, just stick with plain git.