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

181–190 of 785 posts

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

#181

Post by jampekka »

fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

> But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works.

Perhaps you should have. Based on the link it seems like it's more an extension to than replacement for Git.

The page is mostly sort of fluffy AI hype, but the concrete bits are things like integrating issue tracking and PR logic in one tool/repo, like e.g. fossil does.

Also git proper could use some love too. The UI is still a mess. And the large file support and the submodule/subtree/subrepo situations are quite dismal.

> $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size.

Doing this robustly is probably quite far from robotics SOTA.

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

#182

Post by shafyy »

fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

You mean the one they try to build in The Office?

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

#183

Post by dirkc »

gyulai wrote: post #88
fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

> I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably ... People complaining about investors throwing stupid sums of money at stupid or trivial things unrelated (or only marginally related) to AI? ...sounds to me like the first glimpse of hope I have come across in this industry for half a decade.

Is it unrelated though?

> Today, with Git, we're all teaching swarms of agents to use a tool built for sending patches over mailing lists. That's far from what is needed today.

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

#185

Post by debarshri »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #136
debarshri wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing i learned about raising capital it, you need to build or have a network. Thats YC is great, accelerators, incubators help you do that. Network and story you tell. Also, every stage you raise, you have to make sure the folks you raise from help you craft the narrative for thr next round. I think if you have a healthy busy growing well, you shouldnt raise unless you have ambition and urge to go faster. Irony of t…

> I think if you have a healthy busy growing well, you shouldnt raise unless you have ambition and urge to go faster. This is the reason why I don't wish for VC investments if I do something preferably. Also I feel like your comment is highly accurate, I feel like this narrative though can sometimes be the only thing that matters, something like a vibes based economy. I don't like this so much because some idea's tec…

I am twice your age so i would assume i have some wisdom here.

Flex often dont translate to value. I often say dont look at what others are doing, head down focus and execute. Raising capital is actually the starting point, i would say it is not an achievement.

I think anyone can network. You dont have to be sales person, you have the increase your probability to be in the right place at the right time.

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

#186

Post by altmanaltman »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #9
MBCook wrote: post #6

Why does it take $17m to beat Git? How will you ever get the network effects needed to get sustained users with a commercial tool? Given Git was created because BitKeeper, a commercial tool, pulled their permission for kernel developers to use their tool aren’t we ignoring a lesson there?

Apparently it takes $17M and a whole team full of people to do what one guy with a chip on his shoulder could do for free.

Literally true if it's that one guy you're talking about.

Also, you should hear Linus talk about building git himself, what he built wasn't what you know as git today. It didn't even have the commands like git pull, git commit etc until he handed development over.

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

#187

Post by patates »

internet_points wrote: post #171
patates wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to shoot down your comment with sarcasm, I'm being really honest: I changed my shower gel with an expensive one this week, and it really had an unexpected, exciting effect. Small stuff can really have consequences much bigger than themselves. That said, if you ever decide solve the tidying the toys problem, start a kickstarter, I pledge to pledge support! :D

i may be dense or something but what effect?

It smells better, my skin feels better after using it, and I feel happier. Showering may take little time, but I have my skin all the time :)

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

#189

Post by toenail »

farouqjalabi wrote: post #174
tmountain wrote: post #125

I personally feel that: 1) Git is fine 2) I would not want to replace critical open source tooling with something backed by investor capital from its inception. Sure, it will be “open source “, but with people throwing money behind it, there’s a plan to extract value from the user base from day one. I’m tired of being “the product”. Critical open source tooltips by should spring from the community, not from corporate…

Gitbutler is backed by git. Gitbutler is essentially just ui for git which also allows you to have multiple branches. It isn't meant to replace git.

What does that even mean? Multiple branches is a git feature.

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

#190

Post by latexr »

fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

> Why is nobody solving actual problems anymore?

Because solving problems isn’t the goal, the goal is money (and sometimes a little fame) with the least possible effort, and software can be changed on a whim and is very cheap to manufacture and distribute and “fix in flight”, it’s the perfect vehicle for those who are impatient and don’t really care about understanding and studying a need.

Post reply on HN