4 ms·
Git is nearly universal, so highlighting the areas where jj makes things that are painful in git trivial and obvious isn't exactly a bad strategy. It's also wor
by stouset 1y ago
Git is nearly universal, so highlighting the areas where jj makes things that are painful in git trivial and obvious isn't exactly a bad strategy. It's also worthwhile pointing out that it is interoperable with git, so your company and team don't have to change just because you do.
> Am I the only one bad with memorizing SHAs when reading?
I haven't ever needed to memorize a SHA or change ID with jj. What are you referring to?
> Also, does it work with other people? Would it work in repo with 5 contributors? 20? 500?
I have used jj for two years on teams without anyone else needing to be aware. Other teammates that I've convinced to give it a shot have switched, and we all work together happily alongside the git users. If anything, it's easier to work with others when they switch to jj because you no longer have to worry about rewriting history of branches that have been pushed. If you have a branch that multiple people are working on, that's bad form in git but it's just another day with jujutsu.
- Svoka 1y agoI was referring to tutorial(s), which refer to commits just by hashes. It is very hard to read for me. While git is nearly universal, my concern was about leaning jj and what it is useful for, what are its limitation etc.
- nchmy 1y agoBut in jj you can refer to commits, changes etc by the shortest unique substring in its hash, and it automatically highlights what that is sjenfidb skeifixu These could be referred to as sj and sk. And their associated git commit hash might be 2748dn49 48jdj40r Would be 2 and 4 Again, the output highlights those unique prefixes. But there's also jjui, which is an incredible TUI for jj. Makes everything even simpler and efficient than it already was. https://github.com/idursun/jjui https://github.com/idursun/jjui