Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

blog.gitbutler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 785 posts

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#141

Post by operatingthetan »

roncesvalles wrote: post #90
flohofwoe wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf, git is very much a problem that needs solving. It only works well for text data, the fact that it is decentralized adds a lot of complexity but doesn't matter for 99% of users since they use a centralized git forge like Github or Gitlab, and the UX is pretty much non-existent.

But do you really think $17M is going to give us that alternative, or will it come from some brilliant guy going on a caffeine-fueled weeklong side quest (like how Git was invented)? There are some things that need to come from a place of manic self-motivated genius. It's not something that you can buy with money. The money is really just there to help you shove a mediocre solution down everyone's throats (which is e…

I think they are going to give us _something_. Devs probably won't pick it up though.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#142

Post by flomo »

reverius42 wrote: post #115
flomo wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is nobody solving actual problems anymore? Let me just state the obvious. Of all the major problems of society, sorting legos isn't one. If you disagree, try emerging from the cellar.

Maybe you're not a parent. To me, this sounds like arguing against the existence of the dishwasher by saying "of all the major problems of society, washing dishes by hand isn't one."

What a ridiculous statement from an obviously over-privleged phony. You are actually doubling-down on being completely isolated.

Kids face a lot of new problems these days. They also face some old one, like sorting their legos.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#143

Post by icy »

steelbrain wrote: post #28

The source code is hosted on Github: https://github.com/gitbutlerapp/gitbutler I was really hoping we'd see some competition to Github, but no, this is competition for the likes of the Conductor App. Disappointed, I must say. I am tired of using and waiting for alternatives of, Github. The diff view in particular makes me rage. CodeMirror has a demo where they render a million lines. Github starts dying when renderin…

> I am tired of using and waiting for alternatives of, Github.

Are you interested in giving https://tangled.org a try? I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#146

Post by operatingthetan »

rsanheim wrote: post #95

Wow. So much hate in the comments here. Of all the funding / equity events lately, I wonder how this one gets so much doubt and distrust from the start. If this isn’t something to at least root for, in the sense of a small team, novel product, serving a real need, then I dunno what is. You can use jj or tangled and still appreciate improvements to git and vcs on the web in general. Competition amongst many players is…

Why do they need $17m to build this? Vibe code it in a couple weeks, ship it.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#147

Post by grodriguez100 »

politelemon wrote: post #68

The title mentions 'after git' but the video demo shows that it's very much tied to git and Github. The post also mentions the overhead of dealing with git, but the examples shown come with their own overhead and commands. I'm admittedly unable to see the appeal or just misunderstanding it, but the number of stars on the repo shows I'm in the minority.

Yes, I think that “after git” claim is just marketing. This is indeed just a nice frontend to git. It looks interesting and seems to solve real problems, in the same way that jj already does. But it is not a radical change.

Also if they really wanted to “replace git” I think that would be much more difficult due to network effects. Everybody is already using git.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#148

Post by orthecreedence »

> We've raised $17M to build something like git and bait-and-switch it later because VCs only exist to extract value and anything we end up building will be a shadow of a fart of how useful git actually is

FTFY. I don't understand how anyone could think to replace git by raising money. The only way to truly do this is grassroots iteration. You can build the software, but the distribution will never reach the same network size as git before your investors start asking "When do I get my return?"

> Imagine your tools telling you as soon as there are possible merge conflicts between teammates, rather than at the end of the process.

So you're centralizing a fully distributed process because grepping for "I mean, honestly, go for it and build what you want. I'm all for it! But maybe don't compare it to git. It's tone deaf.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#149

Post by Hamuko »

thwarted wrote: post #45
bee_rider wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like git, it works perfectly fine on my command line. I do wonder, though, if it would have been designed differently if the whole “code forge” sort of application (or whatever GitHub and the like are called) was envisioned at the time. Pull requests aren’t even a concept in git proper, right? It seems like a kind of important type of tool. Even though git is awesome, we don’t need a monoculture.

> or whatever GitHub and the like are called GitHub is a social networking site that just so happens to have code hosting related features.

People keep saying this but I can't really find much anything social about GitHub.
Post reply on HN