←back to thread

94 points vincent_s | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
hakube ◴[] No.40915275[source]
why does Git need to be replaced?
replies(2): >>40917348 #>>40920741 #
krick ◴[] No.40917348[source]
This. It's not like we are looking for something slightly better than git in some opinionated way. There's plenty better than git. Mercurial is better than git and as old as git. Git won. Everybody uses git. Everyone who knows, how to use git, is mostly comfortable using git. At this stage we either need something ground-breaking (and I don't quite imagine what this cold be in the context of VCS - even truly semantic conflict resolution barely cuts it, while simultaneously being pure unattainable magic), or I don't think this is gonna float. I don't need it. Who needs it?

It's a relatively easy thing to adopt something you don't need, when you are the only person involved. But VCS is pretty much in the same category as instant messaging and social network platforms are. In a sense, maybe it is a social network platform. I don't see it happening and I highly doubt I would want it to happed, even if I knew this jj stuff better.

replies(3): >>40918916 #>>40918919 #>>40919759 #
xigoi ◴[] No.40918919[source]
As far as I can tell, Jujutsu solves this problem by being compatible with Git.
replies(1): >>40920115 #
krick ◴[] No.40920115[source]
I'm not sure I see what problem it even solves at all. Like, really, what you cannot achieve with git that you would with this thing?
replies(4): >>40920216 #>>40923672 #>>40924496 #>>40929823 #
sunshowers ◴[] No.40920216[source]
See my testimonial in the other reply to yours. Jujutsu is both more approachable to newcomers and does a fantastic job catering to some of the most advanced workflows. It is truly special (this is not something I'd say for almost any other software project).
replies(1): >>40922337 #
krick ◴[] No.40922337[source]
I've read it, but it doesn't quite answer my question. What I'm hearing is basically "well, it's nicer". Sure, I can believe that even not delving into the subject, because pretty much everything is nicer than git. A bunch of aliases and 3rd party diff are nicer than default git too, I don't think this is what we are talking about. But what problem it solves?

You are saying that rebase-interactive workflow is broken. I do rebase-interactive a lot. Well, maybe it is broken, maybe I would get annoyed about it beyond belief if I spent as much time messing with its internals as you (supposedly) did. But I don't think I often have problems with it as a user. I guess conflict-handling could have been much smarter, but if I keep "temporary" commits very small and atomic it somehow manages to do the job better than I sometimes expect, and in the end I don't think I have any problems with it whatsoever. So, once again, what is the problem jj solves? Can you give some practical, not overly-contrived example when using jj over git is not "nice", but significantly useful, when it saves me somehow?

replies(2): >>40923405 #>>40934722 #
1. martinvonz ◴[] No.40934722[source]
One simple example is undo. You can simply run `jj undo` if you made a mistake (it obviously won't unpush commits to a remote and such). You can go back as many steps as you like.