←back to thread

I see a future in jj

(steveklabnik.com)
295 points steveklabnik | 1 comments | 22 Oct 25 17:21 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
kelnos ◴[22 Oct 25 18:34 UTC] No.45673281[source]▶
At the risk of being unreasonably negative, stuff like this just makes me feel... tired. Git is... fine. I'm sure it doesn't solve every problem for everyone, and oh boy does it still have many rough edges, but it works and (as the article points out), git has won and is widely adopted.

I've extensively used CVS and Subversion in the past. I touched Mercurial and Bazaar when I ran into a project that used it. I remember in the CVS days, SVN was exciting to me, because CVS was such a pain to use, in almost every way. In the SVN days, git was exciting to me, because SVN still had quite a few pain points that poked me during daily use. Again, yes, git had and has rough edges, but nothing that would make me excited about a new VCS, I don't think.

Maybe I'm just getting old, and new tools don't excite me as much anymore. Learning a new tool means spending time doing something that isn't actually building, so my eventual use of the new tool needs to save me enough time (or at least frustration, messily converted into time units) to balance that out. And I need to factor in the risk that the new tool won't actually work out for me, or that it won't end up being adopted enough to matter. So I think I'll wait on jj, and see what happens. If it ends up becoming a Big Deal, I'll learn it.

replies(10): >>45673426 #>>45673659 #>>45673916 #>>45673995 #>>45674049 #>>45674219 #>>45674653 #>>45674662 #>>45675434 #>>45676064 #
1. jauntywundrkind ◴[22 Oct 25 22:39 UTC] No.45676064[source]▶
I personally feel quite capable at git and am not looking for another flow or tool.

But. I think it's incredibly useful for organizations to have patterns for how they use git. There can be huge variance! And there's so many people who don't feel comfortable doing interactive rebases (of their feature branches), or other serious monkeying with history.

(I also think jj's flows are incredibly good about avoiding accidental loss of work in a way that git can be extremely dangerous at.)

I think there's a ton of value to having more of a pattern than the free-form jamming that git gives us. The real value I see in jj is that it's more than the toolbox of things git gives one: it's something more learnable, teachable, and directed than git. And it seems to do it pretty well, with style, and less monkey business. I'm still super greenhorn at jj, and honestly lacking the need for it, but I'm excited to see it come along. Especially since it is compatible with so many other VCS.