4 ms·

I really want to use Pijul, but programming is a team sport. And especially open source. The Pijul equivelent of GitHub is Nest. It's just not there yet. First

I really want to use Pijul, but programming is a team sport. And especially open source. The Pijul equivelent of GitHub is Nest. It's just not there yet. Firstly, there are basically no potential colaborators for the areas i work on. Secondly, it is much less mature ass a platform. In 5 minutes i couldn't find any way to "browse repositories" inn any sense, to discover what is out there. Discussions are not fleshed out as a issue tracker (no tags for a start), though that could be dealt with by using a 3rd party issue tracker. Pijul's whole setup seems like it would solve a bunch of problems I have with git. 1. that a commit maintains its own identity when cherrypicked onto another branch, and its intrinstically linked. Vs in Git where it is a unrelated (but identical) set of changed. 2. the whole merge/rebase dichotomy. In git most people try annd avoid merging the main branch into the feature branch, because it leads to messy history and hard to understand where changes come from, and prefer to instead do rebase. But for a merge you only need to resolve conflicts once. For a rebase you need to resolve them potentially again and again even if those conflicts never would matter to the final version (e.g. if the file that is conflicting has been deleted before HEAD) But Pijul doesn't have seperate merge and rebase because changed in Pijul commute. Which is a mind twise of an idea. But they say they solved it, so nice.

wocram 6y ago
You can use git rerere to avoid the repeated rebase conflicts.
- kelnos 6y ago
  As an obsessive rebaser, in practice I've found that rerere very rarely kicks in during a rebaser unless the conflict looks exactly the same across commit applications, which is rarely the case.
auggierose 6y ago
Programming can be a team sport, but doesn't have to be. It doesn't even have to be a sport.
pmeunier 6y ago
> Firstly, there are basically no potential colaborators for the areas i work on That's correct. On the other hand, this is a network effect, and the Nest, in its current incarnation, is only 3 weeks old. It's getting better every day, though. The two main features I'm working on at the moment are: - CI/CD. This is almost ready to go, it is "sort of" working. One issue that I fixed recently is that Pijul versions are tricky to compute: change A, followed by B, is the same state (guaranteed by design) as B, followed by A. Our version identifiers handle that now (try `pijul log --state`). - Social features, like discoverability, recommendation of collaborations. We're really just getting started at this, and figuring out what works best. I should add that until two weeks ago, the Nest would stop accepting connections at random times, or crash. It's much more stable now, and we can finally think of adding features. > Secondly, it is much less mature ass a platform There are tags for issues. You can configure them in the "Admin" page of your repositories. They're not used very much for Pijul itself, because most issues so far have been closed within minutes or hours after their creation. > Which is a mind twise of an idea. But they say they solved it, so nice. As one of the authors, I can tell you it wasn't easy to get everything to work together, especially for conflicts. But the theory is clear and sound now (and I have good confidence that the implementation is, too): any two patches that could have been created independently can be pushed to a remote repository independently from each other.
- ssivark 6y ago
  Sounds super exciting; thanks for pushing the boundaries on something new and potentially so much better! Please don’t get discouraged by comments pointing out the current limitations of the platform — it just means that the core ideas are interesting/good enough for people to bother critiquing the ancillary aspects. Good tools & platforms take time to build and polish, so kudos and keep at it.
  - pmeunier 6y ago
    > Please don’t get discouraged by comments pointing out the current limitations of the platform Thanks for the kind message. I totally agree, and didn't take the comment as an offense at all (the reason I reminded the relative youth of Pijul is that I know from experience that some people expect Pijul to have many more users than it currently has).
gnufx 6y ago
Pijul would presumably fit well with the development style encouraged by Sourcehut, if you need such a thing. I've never had time to consider integrating Darcs with it.

wocram 6y ago

You can use git rerere to avoid the repeated rebase conflicts.

kelnos 6y ago
As an obsessive rebaser, in practice I've found that rerere very rarely kicks in during a rebaser unless the conflict looks exactly the same across commit applications, which is rarely the case.

auggierose 6y ago

Programming can be a team sport, but doesn't have to be. It doesn't even have to be a sport.

pmeunier 6y ago

> Firstly, there are basically no potential colaborators for the areas i work on That's correct. On the other hand, this is a network effect, and the Nest, in its current incarnation, is only 3 weeks old. It's getting better every day, though. The two main features I'm working on at the moment are: - CI/CD. This is almost ready to go, it is "sort of" working. One issue that I fixed recently is that Pijul versions are tricky to compute: change A, followed by B, is the same state (guaranteed by design) as B, followed by A. Our version identifiers handle that now (try `pijul log --state`). - Social features, like discoverability, recommendation of collaborations. We're really just getting started at this, and figuring out what works best. I should add that until two weeks ago, the Nest would stop accepting connections at random times, or crash. It's much more stable now, and we can finally think of adding features. > Secondly, it is much less mature ass a platform There are tags for issues. You can configure them in the "Admin" page of your repositories. They're not used very much for Pijul itself, because most issues so far have been closed within minutes or hours after their creation. > Which is a mind twise of an idea. But they say they solved it, so nice. As one of the authors, I can tell you it wasn't easy to get everything to work together, especially for conflicts. But the theory is clear and sound now (and I have good confidence that the implementation is, too): any two patches that could have been created independently can be pushed to a remote repository independently from each other.

ssivark 6y ago
Sounds super exciting; thanks for pushing the boundaries on something new and potentially so much better! Please don’t get discouraged by comments pointing out the current limitations of the platform — it just means that the core ideas are interesting/good enough for people to bother critiquing the ancillary aspects. Good tools & platforms take time to build and polish, so kudos and keep at it.
- pmeunier 6y ago
  > Please don’t get discouraged by comments pointing out the current limitations of the platform Thanks for the kind message. I totally agree, and didn't take the comment as an offense at all (the reason I reminded the relative youth of Pijul is that I know from experience that some people expect Pijul to have many more users than it currently has).

gnufx 6y ago

Pijul would presumably fit well with the development style encouraged by Sourcehut, if you need such a thing. I've never had time to consider integrating Darcs with it.