I'm buying into this workflow more the more I use it, but the real gamechanger is (a) parallel threads in worktrees, with (b) enough lifecycle hooks to treat them similarly to spinning up a VM. Specifically for me that means that after I create a worktree I get some local config files copied over and Postgres duplicating my local dev and test databases so I can test in isolation, and then when I close out a worktree…
What I want is a stateful file-writing layer that is aware of all clients (aka agents and humans) and their activity. It provides its own locking mechanisms, and prevents agents from overwriting each others work. That way you could have multiple agents operating on the same codebase, without having to futz with worktrees and all that.
I personally explicitly avoid parallel agents, since it creates too much cognitive debt, and sometimes an agent may need steering towards an architectally sane solution mid-work.
Same here. Reviewing gets harder too and multi tasking kills any kind of productivity if you need to review the code then.
My approach these days is to do one change at a time, until I can fully merge it with confidence.
I tried Zed and was really convinced that I could use it full-time, but the lack of extensions (TODO highlight, TabOut) + other QoL (line number goto as easy as VSCode + tab filter like another comment said). I also thought it was odd that I can't configure the font size in the git commit message editor. On recent additions, the dev container integration was great. Rooting for you Zed!
FYI there is now an extension for TODO highlighting. Not at my machine but it’s something like “comments highlighter”.
I'm having a hard time adjusting to the Project Panel on the right (and, at least for me, hidden by default) - seems like they're trying to bury the concept of a 'file'? It's certainly interesting though, and I'll give it some time - the post says "It feels more natural once you've spent a little time with it"
I think it's more that you don't need to look at the actual tree structure all that often, especially when most codebases follow logical and conventionalised structures you remember these structures and can use Command-P to search for files individually to open and the tree structure becomes something you peek at infrequently to ensure that everything is going in it's right place.
What are parallel agents worth to professional engineers if reviewing the code is a pain (aka non existent) in Zed? Please add proper code review tools (compare with branch|file|revision) and GH pr review tools like IntelliJ!
The new default layout is exactly backwards of what I want. It should go: project tree | text editor | agent view | threads Not to mention on most laptops you'll only have room for about two panes at a time. So they should be focusing on pane management and making it easy to swap between views. Not highlighting 4 pane workflows. Unless you have an ultra-wide monitor, I'd rather have a separate Agents window. I use Ze…
Yeah, first thing I did was change all the locations back. I really dislike the automatic layout change they pushed. Also, watching the change notes, most effort seems to be focused on agents this days, which is a bit worrying. I love Zed because it's great editor that also knows a bit about agents; I don't want it to continue pivoting towards pushing agent management deeper and deeper into the experience.
> I don't want it to continue pivoting towards pushing agent management deeper and deeper into the experience.
AI and agent tooling is the only way this VC-backed company is going to make any money. Nobody is going to pay for a text editor, so they've had no choice but to enshitify it by chasing AI features for the last year+.
I tried Zed and was really convinced that I could use it full-time, but the lack of extensions (TODO highlight, TabOut) + other QoL (line number goto as easy as VSCode + tab filter like another comment said). I also thought it was odd that I can't configure the font size in the git commit message editor. On recent additions, the dev container integration was great. Rooting for you Zed!
use zed agents to build the zed extensions you miss
Love to hear it! (Conductor founder here). This is helpful to know - we're working on adding more agents, Copilot and OpenCode harnesses are among the most popular requests. We also recently built an escape hatch. If you turn on Settings → Experimental → Big Terminal Mode you can create new terminals in the center panel (with ⌘⇧T) and use any agent you'd like (Copilot, OpenCode, etc). It isn't the best experience bec…
Anyone know of a similar tool to conductor for Linux?
The new default layout is exactly backwards of what I want. It should go: project tree | text editor | agent view | threads Not to mention on most laptops you'll only have room for about two panes at a time. So they should be focusing on pane management and making it easy to swap between views. Not highlighting 4 pane workflows. Unless you have an ultra-wide monitor, I'd rather have a separate Agents window. I use Ze…
Yeah, first thing I did was change all the locations back. I really dislike the automatic layout change they pushed. Also, watching the change notes, most effort seems to be focused on agents this days, which is a bit worrying. I love Zed because it's great editor that also knows a bit about agents; I don't want it to continue pivoting towards pushing agent management deeper and deeper into the experience.
I don't have any problem with them investing heavily in this, I just think they need to be smart about the UX and not let the business VC drive the experience this much. Pivoting from text editor to agent manager is a bad choice IMO, when it can easily be both and help people onboard from editor to agentic workflows.