RokCoder wrote:

MonkeyBean2 wrote:

Wouldn't it make more sense to just have it work with git?

I don't think so but I could be wrong.

Is this because you don't want to store your projects in GitHub or because you prefer command-line to GUI?

The only possible negative I see is that you need to install GitHub Desktop but that's not much of an inconvenience. How would working directly with git improve it? With a Scratch project, I always want to view changes before committing and GitHub Desktop gives a nice workflow for comparing image and text files. Are you suggesting the batch file stop short of jumping into GitHub Desktop so the user can diff, commit, push, etc. directly from the command line? Or adding that functionality into the batch file?

This is just me sharing my workflow with the community in case anyone finds it useful (and trying to keep things as simple as possible so that it's accessible to others). Can you elaborate on how working with git would improve this?

Having it work with git locally would work better for users who don't want to put it on GitHub for some reason. I do see the benefit of GitHub Desktop though, so it would make sense to have the option to use either. Using git directly would make this more flexible, for example you could use your own local git server. GitHub Desktop also stores the GitHub repository you're using locally, so maybe there's a way of making these two approaches use the same local repo in case you want to switch between the two for some reason. From what I understand, your project basically commits to the local repo and then pushes it to the github repo in one go (though GitHub Desktop) - having the ability to separate these two actions would make it more flexible.
I'm not very familiar with your project (or github desktop) though so I may have gotten something wrong.

logabe wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, how does this compare to ajskateboarder's https://github.com/ajskateboarder/scratch-git? Is there any way to use this locally or with a different remote (i.e https://codeberg.org/, sourcehut, or a self-hosted git server )?

I hadn't seen that project before. Sounds like it integrates nicely into TurbiWarp which is great. Also sounds like it performs a very similar function - converts Scratch blocks to text to allow diffing, etc. Nice to see the following in the credits -

Thanks to:
@rokcoder-scratch for inspiration, sb3-commit

You can easily change how mine integrates with git via the batch file. Wouldn't be difficult to change the hosting from GitHub. Sounds like ajskateboarder's is probably better to use than mine with TurboWarp. Mine has the advantage with live shared Scratch projects as it can read them directly from the Scratch website.

MonkeyBean2 wrote:

Having it work with git locally would work better for users who don't want to put it on GitHub for some reason. I do see the benefit of GitHub Desktop though, so it would make sense to have the option to use either. Using git directly would make this more flexible, for example you could use your own local git server. GitHub Desktop also stores the GitHub repository you're using locally, so maybe there's a way of making these two approaches use the same local repo in case you want to switch between the two for some reason. From what I understand, your project basically commits to the local repo and then pushes it to the github repo in one go (though GitHub Desktop) - having the ability to separate these two actions would make it more flexible.
I'm not very familiar with your project (or github desktop) though so I may have gotten something wrong.

I think that's a very fair summation. All of the Git interactivity is done in batch files so can be easily modified to operate however you prefer. If you do come up with a way you like it in the batch files, feel free to share here and I'll modify them to allow the user to opt for which approach they want to use.