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

jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

steveklabnik.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 517 posts

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#11

Post by seanhunter »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #9
jansan wrote: post #5

We all need to give ourselves a push and finally make the next step in version control. Github, Google, Microsoft, Meta (did I forget anyone relevant? Probably) should just join forces and finally make it happen, which should not be a problem with a new system that is backend compatible to Git. Sure, Github may lose some appeal to their brand name, but hey, this is actually for making the world a better place.

Every time I see a statement like this I wonder what specific features of git that people feel like are terrible enough that it’s time to completely start over. Besides “the UX is kinda shit and it’s confusing to learn”, which there are many solutions for already that don’t involve reinventing a pretty good wheel.

Right.

How we got git was cvs was totally terrible[1], so Linus refused to use it. Larry McEvoy persuaded Linus to use Bitkeeper for the Linux kernel development effort. After trying Bitkeeper for a while, Linus did the thing of writing v0 of git in a weekend in a response to what he saw as the shortcomings of Bitkeeper for his workflow.[2]

But the point is there had already been vcs that saw wide adoption, serious attempts to address shortcomings in those (perforce and bitkeeper in particular) and then git was created to address specific shortcomings in those systems.

It wasn't born out of just a general "I wish there was something easier than rebase" whine or a desire to create the next thing. I haven't seen anything that comes close to being compelling in that respect. jj comes into that bucket for me. It looks "fine". Like if I was forced to use it I wouldn't complain. It doesn't look materially better than git in any way whatsoever though, and articles like this which say "it has no index" make me respond with "Like ok whatever bro". It really makes no practical difference to me whether the VCS has an index.

[1] I speak as someone who maintained a CVS repo with nearly 700 active developers and >20mm lines of code. When someone made a mistake and you had to go in and edit the repo files in binary format it was genuinely terrifying.

[2] In a cave. From a box of scraps. You get the idea.

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#12

Post by VMG »

7e wrote: post #10

Is it better for AIs? That’s the only reason I would care.

I've had mixed results.

Most models don't have a 100% correct CLI usage and either hallucinate or use some deprecated patterns.

However `jj undo` and the jj architecture generally make it difficult for agents to screw something up in a way that cannot be recovered.

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#13

Post by VMG »

smackmybishop wrote: post #8
tom_alexander wrote: post #6

I'm giving jj a try but one aspect of it I dislike is edits to files are automatically committed, so you need to defensively create empty new commits for your changes. As in, want to browse the repo from a commit 2 weeks ago? Well if you just checkout that commit and then edit a file, you've automatically changed that commit in your repo and rebased everything after it on top of your new changes. So instead you creat…

Just don't ever use `edit`, use `new` instead; then your changes are tracked without making a mess. I think that's much nicer than juggling stashes in git.

... unless you actually want to edit a change!

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#14

Post by mhh__ »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #9
jansan wrote: post #5

We all need to give ourselves a push and finally make the next step in version control. Github, Google, Microsoft, Meta (did I forget anyone relevant? Probably) should just join forces and finally make it happen, which should not be a problem with a new system that is backend compatible to Git. Sure, Github may lose some appeal to their brand name, but hey, this is actually for making the world a better place.

Every time I see a statement like this I wonder what specific features of git that people feel like are terrible enough that it’s time to completely start over. Besides “the UX is kinda shit and it’s confusing to learn”, which there are many solutions for already that don’t involve reinventing a pretty good wheel.

Git is basically fine even though the verbs are backwards - e.g. you shouldn't need to name branches, commits should be far more automatic, but the basic mechanisms are fine.

GitHub is an abomination.

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#16

Post by throawayonthe »

VMG wrote: post #13
smackmybishop wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't ever use `edit`, use `new` instead; then your changes are tracked without making a mess. I think that's much nicer than juggling stashes in git.

... unless you actually want to edit a change!

well, you can do jj new , make your edit, and then do jj squash which will add the changes to the prev revision

i do this for example when i want to see a specific edit highlighted in my editor, it's a nice workflow i think

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#17

Post by arccy »

VMG wrote: post #13
smackmybishop wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't ever use `edit`, use `new` instead; then your changes are tracked without making a mess. I think that's much nicer than juggling stashes in git.

... unless you actually want to edit a change!

still use new, and then squash your changes in. that way you can actually see what changes you made

Re: jj – the CLI for Jujutsu

#20

Post by incognito124 »

VMG wrote: post #13
smackmybishop wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't ever use `edit`, use `new` instead; then your changes are tracked without making a mess. I think that's much nicer than juggling stashes in git.

... unless you actually want to edit a change!

then you `new` & `squash` :)
Post reply on HN