Earlier quoted context omitted.
is there a jj hosting service?
We are working on something https://lubeno.dev
Looks like still a bit early for me, but if you add an RSS feed to your blog, I would at least be reminded to check it out again later :)
We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
401–410 of 785 posts
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need to get some bins that have a top shelf like a toolbox. The low item counts go in the top shelf, segregate the bottom for efficiency. Bin by color.
I love that we are ignoring Git and taking Legos. Anyone have a solution for another annoying problem: 1 missing piece. Somehow got lost halfway through the build.
If you know the ID, I think you can get Lego ship it to you.
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need to get some bins that have a top shelf like a toolbox. The low item counts go in the top shelf, segregate the bottom for efficiency. Bin by color.
I love that we are ignoring Git and taking Legos. Anyone have a solution for another annoying problem: 1 missing piece. Somehow got lost halfway through the build.
It’s always under the most annoying thing to move or get to. Under table legs, couches, etc.
Also, Lego will send you any missing pieces for free.
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#404I 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…
> 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.
Just write down how you'll spend the money to make that, what it'll eventually cost to produce, what the market size will be, and what the price will be, and if it's enough return you can easily convince someone to give you $17m to do it all.
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#405Jumping on the bandwagon, Magit is raising $$$ to Keep Version Control Magical https://github.com/magit/magit/issues/5555
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should ai need this? A linear backlog is enough, a cache, for everything else they can create it new in a short time.
Another commenter explained it: It's about working on multiple branches in parallel. You can only check out one branch at a time currently in git - but with "but" you have all the changes just in memory so different agents can work on different branches at the same time.
That's not even true
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#407I 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…
Git is fine. I would like something better than fine though, especially for dealing with rebase/merge conflicts where I would say Git is mediocre.
> especially for dealing with rebase/merge conflicts where I would say Git is mediocre.
It seems like everyone that hold this opinion want Git to be some magical tool that will guess their intent and automatically resolve the conflict. The only solutions other than surfacing the conflict are locking (transactions) or using some consensus algorithm (maybe powered by logical clocks). The first sucks and no one has been able to design the second (code is an end result, not the process of solving a problem).
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#408I watched the demo video on the git butler home page and agree with the premises that: 1. git is not going away 2. git UX is not great So i appreciate their effort to manage development better as agents make it possible to churn out multiple features and refactors at once. BUT, I reject this premise: 3. Humans will review the code As agents make it possible to do so much more code (even tens of files sucks to review,…
I also concluded based on the video:
4. GitButler is a terrible name for this
5. No one will use the "but" command over "git"
6. The founder needs to learn to enunciate the name of his new product better
And also, your central premise is exactly right. The solution to agents and humans working faster will not be better manual oversight of what they're doing. It's like missing the most important principle of agentic development. Supervise, don't gatekeep.
Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then again, for a fraction of the money US-Americans pay for health insurance, we actually have public health insurance here... Yes, we have higher taxes, yes, we pay more in social security... but in the end we have far less "Working Poor" and I know very, very, very, very few people who have more than 1 job. But I guess that's just socialist bullshit. What I am trying to convey is: The US lives in its own bubbl…
Europe is far from perfect though. In all the three countries I'm familiar with (UK, Sweden, Spain) the healthcare system is really struggling. Extremely long wait times are becoming more common, for more procedures, even in the emergency departments. But the taxes remain very high, especially on income so it hits middle-class professionals the hardest. In some countries like Spain (and increasingly Sweden) they are…
Long wait times are increasingly also a major problem in US healthcare, so I'm inclined to believe that the root causes behind wait time problems aren't related to public vs private insurance systems.