I see a future in jj • Hacker News Board

Re: I see a future in jj

#151

Post by jjmarr » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 2:57 AM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #109

Vinnl wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having said that, I don't know why a "jjhub" is needed. Github seems fine. jj's just a UI for git. When you make a change to a pr in response to review feedback, do you just jj edit it in, and end up with a force push on GitHub? After which the review comment might get detached from the code or even hidden. That's definitely something that could be better for me. (That said, there are other projects making it bette…

Yeah, I always force push. I always treat PRs as one atomic unit ("squash and merge") and the history that goes into the PR isn't relevant to me after it's merged. Maybe once or twice I've regretted this (maybe you want to backport one part of this PR to the release branch, and now you have to manually create that) but in general, how something is made can be ugly and it feels good to me to erase it when something is…

I'm banned from force-pushing at work so this makes jujutsu a challenge for me.

The workflow still functions, it just requires me to manually update bookmarks.

Re: I see a future in jj

#152

Post by wocram » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 2:59 AM UTC

I think jj is great, godspeed!

Re: I see a future in jj

#153

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:00 AM UTC

RustSupremacist wrote: post #132

This is one person's career move that is defended by the idea that they somehow always make good bets. This is more than a bit arrogant. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. I don't see a future for this. I see a series of blog posts that culminate in a tone deaf "What went wrong" finale.

[deleted]

Re: I see a future in jj

#154

Post by wmedrano » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:02 AM UTC

j2kun wrote: post #70

> I also don’t mean to imply that everyone at Google is using jj, but the contingent feels significant to me, given how hard it is to introduce a new VCS inside a company of that size. I don't mean to imply that Google is fickle, but anything besides Google's perforce fork is deprecated every few years. We used to have a proper git wrapper, then mercurial+extensions, now jj is supposed to replace the mercurial thing,…

I hope it sticks around so that I can use the same workflow at work and home. I'm really enjoying how fast all the jj operations are compared to mercurial.

Re: I see a future in jj

#155

Post by dcre » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:09 AM UTC

oefrha wrote: post #130

I gave jj two honest tries. While first class conflicts is a cool idea, in practice I deal with staging/committing 30x more than conflict resolution, and coming from magit, using jj’s hunk split & select felt like being thrown into stone age. Plus I rebase a lot and get a lot of jj’s benefits from magit’s various rebase shortcuts already, IIRC first class conflicts was the only truly novel thing I didn’t have. For pe…

I’m curious what the magit hunk selection UX consists in. I couldn’t find any videos showing something substantially different from the one built into jj — the videos I found were meant as beginner intros.

I’ve never used magit but I used GitUp (https://gitup.co/) for years before jj. I don’t find the jj one super natural, but I feel like that’s mostly a matter of keyboard shortcuts — I need to see if they can be customized.

Re: I see a future in jj

#156

Post by dcre » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:13 AM UTC

hu3 wrote: post #117

keyle wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

This is very funny. People just love jj! There are no conflicts of interest, at least not until now that there is a company built around jj. But they also started it because they love jj!

Re: I see a future in jj

#157

Post by dcre » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:16 AM UTC

mrbonner wrote: post #118

Is there a jj tutorial not assuming git knowledge at all? I'd love to see how to approach jj without git.

Someone attempted that a couple of months ago: https://jj-for-everyone.github.io/

Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45083952

Re: I see a future in jj

#158

Post by bitbasher » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:17 AM UTC

weinzierl wrote: post #51

I think the real news is that some people have started to build what might become something like a "jjhub" . https://ersc.io/

This is a great thing and I'm hoping for its success. It's about time we have a real alternative to Github.

Re: I see a future in jj

#159

Post by gneray » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:21 AM UTC

Say what you will -- East River Source Control is a great name

Re: I see a future in jj

#160

Post by jasonpeacock » Thu, Oct 23, 2025, 3:24 AM UTC

bananaboy wrote: post #139

jasonpeacock wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perforce’s binary support is basically equivalent to Git LFS, it does the same thing. What does Perforce binary support have that Git LFS doesn’t? AFAIK, the base issue that Perforce is already in use and it has enterprise support.

What do you mean by this? It's hardly equivalent to LFS. The binary files aren't replaced with a text pointer with actual content stored on a server elsewhere. Binary files are stored in the same place as text files.

From the user's perspective, when setup correctly Git LFS is transparent and they don't see the text pointers - the binary files are replaced on push and pull to the server.

It's the same user experience as Perforce?

Yes, Git is more low-level and it's possible to see those text pointers if you want to.