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

501–510 of 785 posts

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

#501

Post by jiggunjer »

Meleagris wrote: post #17

I recently switched to Jujutsu (jj) and it made me realize that “what comes after Git” might already exist. It turns out the snapshot model is a perfect fit for AI-assisted development. I can iterate freely without thinking about commits or worrying about saving known-good versions. You can just mess around and make it presentable later, which Git never really let you do nicely. Plus there’s essentially zero learning…

Definitely not true about models knowing jj. I've had latest opus and gpt fail at revsets and fileset syntax, even hallucinating subcommands like jj move (maybe it existed before, interface is not stable). Luckily it's easy enough to not need them most of the time.

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

#502

Post by [deleted] »

jcfrei wrote: post #221
progx wrote: post #127

Earlier 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.

[deleted]

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

#504

Post by PunchyHamster »

Meleagris wrote: post #17

I recently switched to Jujutsu (jj) and it made me realize that “what comes after Git” might already exist. It turns out the snapshot model is a perfect fit for AI-assisted development. I can iterate freely without thinking about commits or worrying about saving known-good versions. You can just mess around and make it presentable later, which Git never really let you do nicely. Plus there’s essentially zero learning…

It seems to have been build on great idea. Git's "plumbing" is just a set of snapshots of the tree, and everything above is built on that so replacing the porcelain with something better fitting the problem is far more useful than trying to reinvent the wheel and making yet another distributed tree snapshot based VCS just to reinvent user facing tooling like the other VCS tried

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

#505

Post by troyvit »

schacon wrote: post #475
troyvit wrote: post #461

Huh. I look at what it took to build Git to begin with[1] and have to wonder if the thing that comes after it is really going to be _that much_ better. Git came about because there was a need for it. I feel like GitButler came about because there was a need for funding. Maybe I just need to have my coffee before commenting. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git#History

I'm trying not to comment on too many of these, but this one is interestingly wrong to me, so why not indeed? GitButler came about many years ago because I have been using Git for almost the full 20 years of it being around and I thought there could be a better way to do the things it's trying to solve for us. I want version control to do more for us, easier, faster and smarter. Git is still pretty dumb. Plus, now, e…

I bet I should've had that coffee first :)

You use git at a level beyond mine; I've been fumbling with it for maybe 2/3 of the time you've been actually using it, so I appreciate you even taking the time to respond.

I think what gets me is that according to the article, GitButler is designed "for the GitHub Flow style" of development. git isn't limited to one flow, why should its successor be? Git didn't need $17M funding (and the strings that come attached to that) to change the world. Why should its successor?

But yeah I should've had that coffee first, so thanks for the respectful push-back and I hope the rest of the community appreciates it.

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

#507

Post by andiareso »

Jesus this website is overstimulating and it's extremely difficult to understand. What the hell they are selling other than a UI on top of Git? Git works perfectly fine especially if you take an hour or two to learn how to do a few more complicated but useful workflows (rebasing, cherry-picking).

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

#508

Post by PunchyHamster »

arnvald wrote: post #209
toenail wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I think it means parallel branches. Normally in git you can use one branch at a time. With agentic coding you want agents to build multiple features at the same time, each in a separate branch

Sooooo git worktree. It's exactly that. One repository dir checked out in different places with different branches.

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

#509

Post by itsderek23 »

How I'm using git/Github has changed with agentic coding. However, I'm not using swarms of agents to write code, so it's bit hard for me to decipher the JTBD of gitbutler.

Another take I've seen is https://agentrepo.com/, which is light-weighted hosted git that's easy for agents to use (no accounts, no API keys, public repos are free). There are large parts of the GitHub experience I'm no longer using (mostly driving from Claude), so I think this is an interesting take.

Post reply on HN