I use `git rebase -i` all the time and it's great but it involves rewriting history, which essentially means the result is almost guaranteed to give you conflic

I use `git rebase -i` all the time and it's great but it involves rewriting history, which essentially means the result is almost guaranteed to give you conflicts in any case where you want to merge or rebase it with another branch that shares some of the commits in your rebase. Whereas in Pijul history is preserved. In Pijul a "branch" (called a "channel") is just a set of applied patches. I'm still a little ignorant but if I'm not mistaken the way Pijul encodes patches, in a big graph, also means that they're more likely to be composable without conflicts in the first place. And when conflicts do arise their resolutions will be more reusable. Just today I was performance profiling various subsets of a set of changes using "git cherry-pick" and "git revert", to understand how these changes interacted and which ones gave the best results. It was fine but I had to do quite a bit of conflict resolution because some of them were based on one branch and some on another, and the resulting wouldn't even be easily mergable/reusable anyway. What if I could instead just pick a few patches I wanted to mix & match and run some benchmarks over every combination of them? Then I could pick the fastest combo without needing to worry about messing up my history? With Pijul I imagine this would be a breeze. I'm looking forward to trying it now that it's getting stable.