151–160 of 517 posts
Although jj as a vcs system, it does feel better, working with git through it still feels like a chore, but to be fair I only gave it a day before going back to git.
Does anyone have any good resources on how to augment a git flow through the lens of a git hosting platform to work smoothly and still reap the benefits of jj?
"It's more powerful and easier" is a great claim, but I need examples in this opening page to convince me of the pain I could save myself or the awesome things I'm living without.
if you don't need this, you might not see any value in jj and that's ok. you might use magit to get the same workflow (maybe? haven't used magit personally) and that's also ok.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are you "checking out" the old commit? It sounds like you're using `jj edit`, which I'd argue does what it says on the tin. Switch to using `jj new ` and your problem goes away.
That avoids the problem for the specific workflow of checking out an old revision (and it was what I was describing with checking out a new branch off the old commit and adding a blank commit to that branch), but another way this design bites me: At work I am constantly jumping around numerous repos because I might be working on repo but then someone on my team will ask for help with repo . So I'll turn on screen sha…
Does JJ really prefer for me to think backwards? It wants me to start with the new and describe command, but with git I first make the changes and name the changeset at the end of the workflow. I also often end up with in a dirty repo state with multiple changes belonging to separate features or abstractions. I usually just pick the changes I want to group into a commit and clean up the state. Since it's git compatib…
the working tree being a commit has wide ranging implications as all the commands that work with commits start working with the working tree by default.
Now that Steve is part of a GitHub competitor to push jj, I see all these posts as just sales pitches.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are you "checking out" the old commit? It sounds like you're using `jj edit`, which I'd argue does what it says on the tin. Switch to using `jj new ` and your problem goes away.
That avoids the problem for the specific workflow of checking out an old revision (and it was what I was describing with checking out a new branch off the old commit and adding a blank commit to that branch), but another way this design bites me: At work I am constantly jumping around numerous repos because I might be working on repo but then someone on my team will ask for help with repo . So I'll turn on screen sha…
I tried jj for a few months. It was fun to learn a new thing, but I haven't had a single case of "wow, this would have been a pain with git". Then I went back to git (it's been 6 months now) and I haven't had a single case of "this is so painful, I wish something better existed". So it felt like the XKCD on "standards": I now have one versioning system, if I learn jj I will have two. What for? Don't get me wrong: it'…
> Then I went back to git (it's been 6 months now) and I haven't had a single case of "this is so painful, I wish something better existed". The core issues are: how long did it take you to get there, how many lucky decisions did you have to make to not run into git footguns, and how many other people accidentally made different choices and so have very different experiences from you?
I am fine with that. I am just saying that the "you should use jj, you will finally stop shooting yourself in the foot regularly" doesn't work so well for me, because I don't remember shooting myself in the foot with git.
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…