I don't like much the idea of naming a branch by a number. I use git-flow (https://github.com/nvie/gitflow) and there is a standard name convention.
It would be nice to adapt the pit hook to branch name of the form : pit<num> or in regexp /.pit\d+$/
On the other hand I use wedoist.com
They don't have any API for now (http://wedoist.com/Help/showQuestion/137)
It would definitively be great to have the ability to synchronize task with this service.
Other than the fact that they're both command-line project managers, these don't look all that similar. Among other things, pit is designed to store your data in your home directory, while ditz is designed to store it in your VC system. Pit has git commit hooks, but it doesn't look like ditz does.
_Nothing_ beats command line productivity. If it all happens at the same moment I'm managing git, I expect this tool to be perfect for project management needs.
1) There is single PITFILE that contains all tasks (which means that it would be source of conflicts in all task-related commits).
2) PITFILE contains tasks for all your projects instead of the current one, which means that it isn't really good candidate for storing inside your project's repository. This could be worked-around by exporting PITFILE every now and then, but it's far from perfect.
If you wan to make it useful then I would propose:
1) Store tasks inside git repository (maybe special refs/tasks/* tree? Like for tags or notes: refs/tags/* , refs/notes/*).
2) Store each task in separate file, that is: .git/refs/tasks/001, .git/refs/tasks/002, etc.
I don't like much the idea of naming a branch by a number. I use git-flow (https://github.com/nvie/gitflow) and there is a standard name convention.
It would be nice to adapt the pit hook to branch name of the form : pit<num> or in regexp /.pit\d+$/
On the other hand I use wedoist.com They don't have any API for now (http://wedoist.com/Help/showQuestion/137) It would definitively be great to have the ability to synchronize task with this service.