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

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

blog.gitbutler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 785 posts

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

#681

Post by 1718627440 »

AndrewOMartin wrote: post #652
1718627440 wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

It's already well explained in a sibling comment, but on a more conceptual basis, while commits are interpreted as diffs on the fly, a commit is a single (immutable) snapshot. So in these terms, "splitting a commit" amounts to introducing an intermediate snapshot. Having that in mind, it should become clear, that using Git you create the snapshot by working from the previous or next commit (what ever suits you more), bringing it to the state, you like it to be and commit. (In theory you could create that intermediate snapshot from any commit, but likely you want to do it from on of the direct neighbors.)

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

#682

Post by Izkata »

raincole wrote: post #195
fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

> one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. And what's the next step? I can't even imagine how rich (and how large the their houses) the parents need to be for them to comfortably buy such dedicated tool. Perhaps 100x~1000x richer than me? And, while this is just pulled out from my rear side, I…

Roborock released one of these about a year ago. It doesn't do as much as they want, but it can pick up things and put them into designated locations, shoes being the main example.

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

#683

Post by password4321 »

Orygin wrote: post #326
qrobit wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a reminder that even if you managed to amend those commits and force-push, the commits would still exist and will be addressable given the hash is known.

Can't they be purged if they are dangling and the housekeeping is ran?

related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41060102 Anyone can access deleted and private repository data on GitHub

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

#685

Post by 000ooo000 »

MagicMoonlight wrote: post #661
MidnightRider39 wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is how to make money from something that is more or less solved.

It’s not solved because it’s trash. There’s no good interface for it and people find it difficult to use.

Skill issue. It's the most popular VCS in the world by a huge margin, millions of devs use it every day just fine, countless forges have been built around it, and there's only one semi-compelling alternative frontend (jj). If you honestly find Git challenging, how are you coping with software engineering? Git is the easy part.

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

#686

Post by BobbyTables2 »

mervz wrote: post #623
MidnightRider39 wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is how to make money from something that is more or less solved.

Yep, something that is sadly becoming more and more common. People with solutions spending insane money trying to convince others that a problem exists.

The beauty of it all is one doesn’t even have to invent a solution… they only have to invent a “problem” to be pitched for VC funding.

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

#687

Post by MikeNotThePope »

MidnightRider39 wrote: post #593
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…

The problem is how to make money from something that is more or less solved.

As a spoon designer, I have had some difficulty finding work lately.

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

#688

Post by endofreach »

"We’re not building some “better git”.

We’re building the infrastructure for how software gets built next."

Dude, aside from this type of phrasing being cringe, it's such blatantly obvious LLM induced psychosis phrase... ridiculous.

I didn't even read that insanely long article explaining why one would need this (the necessity should have rang one or two bells for the author)... but all i could think of before reading that cringe ending, was: you're building what comes after git, but carry "git" in your name seems kinda odd... already revealing you either don't believe your own claims, or you do, but don't really mean what you're claiming... either way: WTF. Insane what's getting funded.

Also: the trend of companies overly feeling the need to explain they're not just X + AI (which also means LLM API), should really ring a lot of other bells to everyone else... god damn, too many bells to ring... and it seems like there is only AI chatbots left, that respond to anyone ringing the bell... god damn... they already took over & infected the human brain...

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

#689

Post by utilize1808 »

Valodim wrote: post #553
jlokier wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can just mess around and make it presentable later, which Git never really let you do nicely. I'm surprised to read that, because that's how I've always used Git (and GitHub). That's what I've understood to be good practice with Git, and it was liberating compared with what came before. One of the nicest things about Git is you can throw things in locally without worrying about how it looks, and make it present…

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.

You sweat because you are working with the CLI. Git is intrinsically "graphical". Use a good GUI client or higher level interface (maybe jj) to manipulate git graphs --- stop worrying about "how" (i.e. wrangling with CLI to achieve what you want) and focus more on "what".
Post reply on HN