Looks nice. The two biggest problems I have based off the README, in order:
1. Only 1 git remote? I need at least `master` and `heroku` for all of my projects, and often I'll need one or two extra `github` remotes for other forks/collaborators.
2. I wish it had pictures of what exactly it was doing (git graph-style stacks of commits before/after each commit).
I completely agree with your first point, but I do think that the majority of people using git probably don't have more than a single remote. I am sure there are those few people that are tasked with pulling (and hopefully, pushing) to the upstream, and likely a deployment remote like Heroku probably exists behind some process or script.
I do think that the majority of people using git probably don't have more than a single remote
Strong disagree. Nowadays the majority of git-users probably interacts with github.
Just count the number of "Fork me on github"-ribbons that you come across on any given day.
The github workflow for forking a repository[1] involves two remotes (origin and upstream).
1. Only 1 git remote? I need at least `master` and `heroku` for all of my projects, and often I'll need one or two extra `github` remotes for other forks/collaborators.
2. I wish it had pictures of what exactly it was doing (git graph-style stacks of commits before/after each commit).