We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git • Hacker News Board

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

#651

Post by red_admiral » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 7:47 PM UTC

1718627440 wrote: post #631

red_admiral wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed they're not; they live on the 'user layer' rather than the 'application layer'. That's not to say many git-frontends (IntelliJ, Sourcetree, Github desktop) don't support them, but "git pullrequest" isn't a thing. Edit: see "git request-pull" as mentioned below (file:///C:/Program%20Files/Git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/git-request-pull.html) but what it does is write "a pretty email" (the other poster's words) t…

> mentioned below (file:///C:/Program%20Files/Git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/git-request-pull.html) What? Is the intention, that I access your C: drive? Also is it common to have a file:// link on MS Windows? I thought this was a unix thing.

Sorry. For some reason I used to get `git help ...` redirect me to the (URL of) the actual website.

I think the file:/// is so that you can fire off "[cmd /c] start FILEPATH" to load the default browser, while also not having to worry about spaces in the path.

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

#652

Post by AndrewOMartin » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

1718627440 wrote: post #622

Valodim wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also did that with git, but it's no comparison in ergonomics. For instance, "move this hunk two commits up" is a task that makes many git users sweat. With jj it's barely something that registers as a task.

> For instance, "move this hunk two commits up" is a task that makes many git users sweat. Citation needed. You split the commit anyway you like, e.g. with the mouse or using cursor movements or by duplicating and deleting lines. Then you move it with the mouse or cursor or whatever and squash it into the other commit. Maybe some people never intend to do it, but then these probably also don't want to learn JJ. I gue…

I'm one of the git users who would sweat. Can you explain a bit (out link relevant docs) how I might split a commit up, and move it?

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

#653

Post by buffington » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 7:49 PM UTC

conartist6 wrote: post #534

myroon5 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step 1: don't pitch from a conartist6 username

It's been my username for 20 years and I'm not changing it to be more corpo-propriate now. I think it makes more sense if you know that my name is Conrad. It's pretty easy to find out who I am in the real world too. For one thing I'm a private pilot and for 10 years I had an airplane personally registered to me, making my name and address a matter of (open) public record.

> I'm not changing it to be more corpo-propriate now.

Look, I'm not wanting to be rude here, and this is obviously all hypothetical since you're likely not actively pitching to investors, but if you were, being stubborn in this way would be a deal breaker for me as an investor.

I see all the reasons you have for keeping it, and they're reasonable, but the mere idea that that's a hill you're willing to die on is a red flag. I'd see this as one of many potential points of friction. Where else will you choose to not make compromises?

Maybe it's not rational on my part, but you're trying to convince irrational entities to part with their money.

You could look at it this way: if someone offered $17M to change it, would you?

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

#654

Post by farouqjalabi » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 7:51 PM UTC

lamasery wrote: post #636

farouqjalabi wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite, Gitbutler allows you to apply multiple branches to the code base at once. With codebases you will have multiple code bases not one. for example: It allows me to test coworkers branches with mine without merging or creating new branch. It has many features that makes it super easy to add patch to any commit in any branch

Seconding others here, what you're bringing up as distinct features of Gitbutler seems to just be stuff git can do. - One local copy of a repo with multiple work trees checked out at once, on different branches/commits? Git does that. - "Add a patch to any commit in any branch" I can't think of a way of interpreting this statement (and I can think of a couple!) that isn't something git can do directly. Maybe it adds…

Yeah ur right, Gitbutler is just UI that makes it easier to do the mentioned stuff.

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

#655

Post by _3u10 » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:11 PM UTC

chipsrafferty wrote: post #649

da_chicken wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me it's not clear what the problem is that would require a redesign. The interface is still bad. Teaching people to use git is still obnoxious because it's arcane . It's like 1e AD&D. It does everything it might need to, but it feels like every aspect of it is bespoke. It's also relatively difficult to make certain corrections. Did you ever accidentally commit something that contains a secret that can't be in th…

> Well, you might want to throw that entire repository away and restore it from a backup before the offending commit because it's so difficult to fix and guarantee that it's not hiding in there somewhere and while also not breaking something else. I'm not a git expert but I cant image that's true

It’s not you just need to force push or generate a new key…

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

#656

Post by paradox460 » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:12 PM UTC

aabhay wrote: post #306

dagurp wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem with Jujutsu is the name. I would love to hear a Swedish person try to pronounce it.

Its a backronym (or whatever you call it) that cones from the actual name, “jj”, which itself comes from the ease of typing jj on a keyboard

The logo is a pair of bluejays, so I've taken to casually calling it twojay with some of my coworkers.

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

#657

Post by wayeq » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:15 PM UTC

utilize1808 wrote: post #496

Nowadays I just ask my LLM butler to "organize outstanding changes into coherent commits". No new software needed.

'Stacked PRs' are back on the menu with Claude, because changing something in PR1 isn't a massive time sync to get PR2-5 back in shape, as Claude can usually handle all of that for me.

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

#658

Post by gtowey » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:17 PM UTC

da_chicken wrote: post #644

trashb wrote: post #533

> The old model assumed one person, one branch, one terminal, one linear flow. Not only has the problem not been solved well for that old model, it’s now only been compounded with our new AI tools. A bit of a strange thing to say in my book. Git isn't SVN and I think these problems are already solved with git. I agree that the interface is not always very intuitive but Git has the infrastructure which is very much fo…

> To me it's not clear what the problem is that would require a redesign. The interface is still bad. Teaching people to use git is still obnoxious because it's arcane . It's like 1e AD&D. It does everything it might need to, but it feels like every aspect of it is bespoke. It's also relatively difficult to make certain corrections. Did you ever accidentally commit something that contains a secret that can't be in th…

The interface can be independent of the implementation. Under the hood git does everything you need. If learning to use it at a low level isnt appealing, then you can put an interface on top which is more ergonomic.

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

#659

Post by blipvert » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:17 PM UTC

mentalgear wrote: post #612

jakeydus wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VCs are not particularly well known for their commitment to building products that they can't make money off of. They'll promise you the OSS world and then as soon as they can they'll pull the rug out from under you.

To paraphrase Microslop's "Embrace, extend ... build a walled garden around."

“enclose”?

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

#660

Post by antod » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 8:17 PM UTC

malicka wrote: post #584

nine_k wrote: post #578

The tool that could replace git must free, ubiquitous, and arguably open-source. This is why I cannot imagine how raising $17M may pay for itself in that case, to say nothing of a 10× return. It may be a great tool, but I'd be very reluctant to use a closed-source solution as a cornerstone of infrastructure.

I would argue it being proprietary would be completely unacceptable, for such a position of importance. In any case, Git has become tremendously entrenched over the past couple decades. Anything that hopes to replace it would have to be significantly better to break from the inertia Git has. I’m honestly skeptical as to whether this is even possible in the near future. We’re not at all in the same historical moment a…

git's replacement won't be there because it was better at being what git is (too entrenched), but because git became redundant as the world changed around it. As agentic development takes over and people stop caring about source code, all the tooling (including languages themselves) and approaches to assist humans will be ripe for replacing with those for machines.