[emilecantin]

I tend to have auto-accept on for edits, and once Claude is done with a task I'll just use git to review and stage the changes, sometimes commit them when it's a logical spot for it.

I wouldn't want to have Claude auto-commit everything it does (because I sometimes revert its changes), nor would I want to YOLO it without any git repo... This seems like a nice tool, but for someone who has a very different workflow.

[punnerud]

"Checkpoints for Claude Code" use git under the hood, but stored in .claudecheckpoints folder, to not mess with your own git. Add itself to .gitignore. It auto commits with a git message for the changes done through MCP locally.

[michaelmior]

As someone who doesn't use CC, auto-commit seems like it would be the easiest way to manage changes. It's easy enough to revert or edit a commit if I don't like what happened.

[emilecantin]

It's also very easy to throw away unstaged changes, and to stage exactly what you want. I treat the staging process ("git add") as a code review.

[fastball]

It's also very easy to throw away actual commits, as long as you don't push them (and even then not so difficult if you're in a context where force-pushing is tolerable).

[emilecantin]

True, but it's harder to reject changes in one file, make a quick fix, etc. I like to keep control over my git repo as it's a very useful tool for supervising the AI.

[adastra22]

Do you not use git bisect?

[noodlescb]

Yeah I basically have Claude commit via git regularly and the majority of the other features described her can be done via git. I agree it's a neat idea for someone though.