5 ms·

> You will be hard-pressed to find someone who stuck with it for a week and decided to go back to git. I’ve tried jj on three occasions and I always get confus

> You will be hard-pressed to find someone who stuck with it for a week and decided to go back to git. I’ve tried jj on three occasions and I always get confused by something and just bounce. It hasn’t clicked for me. I’ve only tried it solo hobby projects. For which git is perfectly tolerable. I have many many many complaints about git. But jj doesn’t move the needle for me. Reading this post I am extremely annoyed. Almost every single section is “but more on that later”. It’s still far more complicated than it needs to be. I also really really really hate the jj log rendering. The colors are a sea of barf. Bolding the leading character that represent uniqueness is stupid and adds noise. The username being second is dumb, I almost never care about that. And the bright neon green (empty)(no description set) is such bad spew. Kinda nit picky, but blech. Jujutsu suffers the same thing Git suffers. Every god damn blog post that tries to explain how simple it is just my eyes gloss over and think “this is too complex for me to care”.

viraptor 1y ago
> I also really really really hate the jj log rendering You can fully change/customise it. Sounds like you just don't like the default.
- forrestthewoods 1y ago
  Some people love to tinker and fine tune their tools to behave exactly like they want. I am not one of those people. I hate it. It does not spark my joy. Most people use the default for most of their tools. It’s why Google pays Apple over $20 billion per year to be the default search engine. Because defaults matter.
  - stouset 1y ago
    FWIW, I am also one of those people who does not want to fine tune their tools. I want my tools to work well out of the box. > I’ve only tried it solo hobby projects. If I can surmise a bit, this is probably why it's never felt "worth it". I'm guessing that for a hobby project you don't really care that much about crafting small, easily-digestible PRs or keeping a clean history. `git commit -a` every now and then is good enough, and that's entirely reasonable. For team projects, jj becomes a much bigger deal. I find it invaluable for splitting up a day's worth of work into small, parallel, easily-reviewable changes. While working on one feature I might run across a dozen other things that should be fixed, improved, or otherwise changed. Bundling them into one giant PR is bad practice and causes reviews to take much longer. Carving those up into single-purpose PRs that can be reviewed in seconds and tested independently is super helpful on a project with multiple teammates. But that's not something that really matters or that most people care to take the time do to in personal projects. Hell, it's something a lot of people punt on a lot in git due to the extra burden of doing so.
    - forrestthewoods 1y ago
      I use Sapling at $DayJob. It’s pretty good and I largely like it. jj seems much less friendly for most operations. Although jj’s merge conflict stuff is appealing (in theory).
  - viraptor 1y ago
    But you can't make a default that everyone will like. The best overall interface will have someone hating it. If you want to always use defaults, you're basically guaranteeing that you'll hate some genuinely great software one day.
    - forrestthewoods 1y ago
      I can’t spend a dozen hours fine tuning every single piece of software I come across because it might maybe possibly be great if I do. If I used Git as part of a large team I’d perhaps spend more time with jj. But for solo projects it adds even more complexity to Git rather than reduce. So I don’t feel strongly inclined to spend that time.
BeetleB 1y ago
> I also really really really hate the jj log rendering. The colors are a sea of barf. Bolding the leading character that represent uniqueness is stupid and adds noise. The username being second is dumb, I almost never care about that. And the bright neon green (empty)(no description set) is such bad spew. Kinda nit picky, but blech. Must be a preference thing. Showing me the unique characters is awesome. Git sucks after getting used to it.
- forrestthewoods 1y ago
  > Showing me the unique characters is awesome. Git sucks after getting used to it. I regularly jump around commit hashes. However 99.9% of the time a commit hash is printed I am not going to go to it. So it’s pure noise 99.9% of the time. And the absolute most it can save me when it isn’t noise is a few keystrokes. Not a good design imho.

viraptor 1y ago

> I also really really really hate the jj log rendering You can fully change/customise it. Sounds like you just don't like the default.

forrestthewoods 1y ago
Some people love to tinker and fine tune their tools to behave exactly like they want. I am not one of those people. I hate it. It does not spark my joy. Most people use the default for most of their tools. It’s why Google pays Apple over $20 billion per year to be the default search engine. Because defaults matter.
- stouset 1y ago
  FWIW, I am also one of those people who does not want to fine tune their tools. I want my tools to work well out of the box. > I’ve only tried it solo hobby projects. If I can surmise a bit, this is probably why it's never felt "worth it". I'm guessing that for a hobby project you don't really care that much about crafting small, easily-digestible PRs or keeping a clean history. `git commit -a` every now and then is good enough, and that's entirely reasonable. For team projects, jj becomes a much bigger deal. I find it invaluable for splitting up a day's worth of work into small, parallel, easily-reviewable changes. While working on one feature I might run across a dozen other things that should be fixed, improved, or otherwise changed. Bundling them into one giant PR is bad practice and causes reviews to take much longer. Carving those up into single-purpose PRs that can be reviewed in seconds and tested independently is super helpful on a project with multiple teammates. But that's not something that really matters or that most people care to take the time do to in personal projects. Hell, it's something a lot of people punt on a lot in git due to the extra burden of doing so.
  - forrestthewoods 1y ago
    I use Sapling at $DayJob. It’s pretty good and I largely like it. jj seems much less friendly for most operations. Although jj’s merge conflict stuff is appealing (in theory).
- viraptor 1y ago
  But you can't make a default that everyone will like. The best overall interface will have someone hating it. If you want to always use defaults, you're basically guaranteeing that you'll hate some genuinely great software one day.
  - forrestthewoods 1y ago
    I can’t spend a dozen hours fine tuning every single piece of software I come across because it might maybe possibly be great if I do. If I used Git as part of a large team I’d perhaps spend more time with jj. But for solo projects it adds even more complexity to Git rather than reduce. So I don’t feel strongly inclined to spend that time.

BeetleB 1y ago

> I also really really really hate the jj log rendering. The colors are a sea of barf. Bolding the leading character that represent uniqueness is stupid and adds noise. The username being second is dumb, I almost never care about that. And the bright neon green (empty)(no description set) is such bad spew. Kinda nit picky, but blech. Must be a preference thing. Showing me the unique characters is awesome. Git sucks after getting used to it.

forrestthewoods 1y ago
> Showing me the unique characters is awesome. Git sucks after getting used to it. I regularly jump around commit hashes. However 99.9% of the time a commit hash is printed I am not going to go to it. So it’s pure noise 99.9% of the time. And the absolute most it can save me when it isn’t noise is a few keystrokes. Not a good design imho.