12 ms·

Hi, author here. Since the target audience is people with little to no Git experience, a detailed comparison would not make sense. I did simply make that claim

Hi, author here. Since the target audience is people with little to no Git experience, a detailed comparison would not make sense. I did simply make that claim because the weirdness of Git's UI is usually justified by saying how powerful it is. So this statement is just intended to ease the readers mind that they're not missing out on power by choosing a tool that's easier to learn.

jennyholzer 1y ago
I appreciate this perspective. IMO, the authors and evangelists of Git are essentially correct when they argue about its power. However, I think that it's extremely difficult to gain practical experience with using Git in a high-powered, high-agency way, mostly because there are a lot of abstract concepts at play and there is no easily accessible place where these concepts can be "discovered". Basically, Git is as good as it's cracked up to be, but only if you're an expert. If you're interested in becoming a Git expert, I cannot recommend Emacs Magit strongly enough. If not, I think Jujutsu could be an quicker road to a high-agency version control workflow. It's at least worth considering. I feel confident that Jujutsu can succeed, in particular because of Git's harsh difficulty curve.
- senekor 1y ago
  Thanks, but I consider myself a Git expert already :-) I read the Pro Git book cover to cover. I have a gluten-free, artisanal, free-range git config that I've grown and cared for over years. single character aliases all the important commands, "log all graph oneline", "commit amend no-edit", interactive rebase (ofc. with autosquash, autostash, updaterefs and rebasemerges), reset hard, push force-with-lease... Also: commit signing, url rewriting, conditional configs for different orgs, all that jazz. I was super productive with it and loved it. And then Jujutsu came along and casually doubled my VCS productivity. I didn't see it coming!
  - nocman 1y ago
    Is there a particular pain point (or set of pain points) that you have using git which is removed when you use Jujutsu? I am interested to know, because there seem to be a small number of people who really seem to like it, and up to this point I haven't been able to understand what it is that they are all so excited about.
    - nchmy 1y ago
      for me, everything git is a pain point. But its not so much painpoints that it addresses, as it is that it just makes entirely new things dead-simple to do, especially via jjui. "megamerges" are one such example. ive shared many links, here and in other posts
      - nocman 1y ago
        > for me, everything git is a pain point Yeah, I was looking for something (or "things") specific. An "I hate everything about it" explanation doesn't really compel me to try out the alternative. > "megamerges" are one such example. ive shared many links, here and in other posts I read through one megamerge link you shared ( https://v5.chriskrycho.com/journal/jujutsu-megamerges-and-jj-absorb/ https://v5.chriskrycho.com/journal/jujutsu-megamerges-and-jj... ). So the argument seems to be (forgive me if I'm reading this wrong), if you have multiple versions of a single set of source files that all have differing changes, for you JuJutsu makes it easier (easier then git, that is) to merge them into the final commit you want to end up with. Is that correct? Just trying to make sure I understand. Honestly, after reading that article I am still not feeling the need to try Jujustu out. I'm still open to being convinced, but have yet to see anything that makes me go "wow, I need to try that!".
        nchmy 1y ago
        "multiple versions" = feature branches, possibly all in progress, probably all related. In a couple seconds, you can create a merge on top of all of them to join up their combined functionality/changes, work on top of that ON ALL OF THEM AT ONCE, and then squash all the relevant changes into the respective PRs that others (who are just using git) can review and merge into main. At this point A LOT has been written in this and other threads, as well as lots of essays and tutorials about how jj just completely transforms your workflow. If you're curious, you'll seek it out. If not, that's fine as well.
- smohare 1y ago
  [dead]
- johnisgood 1y ago
  > If you're interested in becoming a Git expert, I cannot recommend Emacs Magit strongly enough. Yes, Emacs' Magit and Git Cola.
  - mcepl 1y ago
    vim-fugitive
marcuskaz 1y ago
I suppose I want the article written for the experienced developer, convince me why I should try something different than the huge defacto standard that is git. I'm totally open to trying something new, but need a compelling case. Beyond `jj undo` everything else in this thread feels just as complicated as git.
- baq 1y ago
  do you know about git rerere? if yes, you might like jj.
  - spooneybarger 1y ago
    This made me laugh. Thank you.
    - baq 1y ago
      It’s funny because it’s true! ;)
- stavros 1y ago
  There isn't a single thing in jj that's as complicated as git. I could go on to list a few features, but it would sound underwhelming, because you could do all that in git. It's kind of like asking "why would I buy a digital camera when my film camera does all the same things? I can already see what the photo will look like when I take it, and developing my own film isn't that much of a hassle", yet film cameras have gone the way of the dodo, except for the occasional nostalgic enthusiast.
  - cortesoft 1y ago
    I don't think this is what the person you responded to is asking. Their question is more, "why would I buy a digital camera that takes pictures in a new format that only a few cameras understand? All my tooling, 3rd parties, and other camera I own use the standard format. Even though I can see why the new format has advantages, I am still going to have to use the other format for all these other photos I have to work with, and there aren't equivalent tools in the new format for all these other photos things I need to do. Even if I buy this new camera, I am still going to have to work with the old format, so I'll have to learn how to use two formats now, and get used to two tool chains. Since the existing format is something I am going to have to use either way, how is it worth it for me to have to use two formats?"
j2kun 1y ago
> more powerful than git > not missing out on power Two very different claims, and it only makes me more skeptical.

jennyholzer 1y ago

I appreciate this perspective. IMO, the authors and evangelists of Git are essentially correct when they argue about its power. However, I think that it's extremely difficult to gain practical experience with using Git in a high-powered, high-agency way, mostly because there are a lot of abstract concepts at play and there is no easily accessible place where these concepts can be "discovered". Basically, Git is as good as it's cracked up to be, but only if you're an expert. If you're interested in becoming a Git expert, I cannot recommend Emacs Magit strongly enough. If not, I think Jujutsu could be an quicker road to a high-agency version control workflow. It's at least worth considering. I feel confident that Jujutsu can succeed, in particular because of Git's harsh difficulty curve.

senekor 1y ago
Thanks, but I consider myself a Git expert already :-) I read the Pro Git book cover to cover. I have a gluten-free, artisanal, free-range git config that I've grown and cared for over years. single character aliases all the important commands, "log all graph oneline", "commit amend no-edit", interactive rebase (ofc. with autosquash, autostash, updaterefs and rebasemerges), reset hard, push force-with-lease... Also: commit signing, url rewriting, conditional configs for different orgs, all that jazz. I was super productive with it and loved it. And then Jujutsu came along and casually doubled my VCS productivity. I didn't see it coming!
- nocman 1y ago
  Is there a particular pain point (or set of pain points) that you have using git which is removed when you use Jujutsu? I am interested to know, because there seem to be a small number of people who really seem to like it, and up to this point I haven't been able to understand what it is that they are all so excited about.
  - nchmy 1y ago
    for me, everything git is a pain point. But its not so much painpoints that it addresses, as it is that it just makes entirely new things dead-simple to do, especially via jjui. "megamerges" are one such example. ive shared many links, here and in other posts
    - nocman 1y ago
      > for me, everything git is a pain point Yeah, I was looking for something (or "things") specific. An "I hate everything about it" explanation doesn't really compel me to try out the alternative. > "megamerges" are one such example. ive shared many links, here and in other posts I read through one megamerge link you shared ( https://v5.chriskrycho.com/journal/jujutsu-megamerges-and-jj-absorb/ https://v5.chriskrycho.com/journal/jujutsu-megamerges-and-jj... ). So the argument seems to be (forgive me if I'm reading this wrong), if you have multiple versions of a single set of source files that all have differing changes, for you JuJutsu makes it easier (easier then git, that is) to merge them into the final commit you want to end up with. Is that correct? Just trying to make sure I understand. Honestly, after reading that article I am still not feeling the need to try Jujustu out. I'm still open to being convinced, but have yet to see anything that makes me go "wow, I need to try that!".
      - nchmy 1y ago
        "multiple versions" = feature branches, possibly all in progress, probably all related. In a couple seconds, you can create a merge on top of all of them to join up their combined functionality/changes, work on top of that ON ALL OF THEM AT ONCE, and then squash all the relevant changes into the respective PRs that others (who are just using git) can review and merge into main. At this point A LOT has been written in this and other threads, as well as lots of essays and tutorials about how jj just completely transforms your workflow. If you're curious, you'll seek it out. If not, that's fine as well.
smohare 1y ago
[dead]
johnisgood 1y ago
> If you're interested in becoming a Git expert, I cannot recommend Emacs Magit strongly enough. Yes, Emacs' Magit and Git Cola.
- mcepl 1y ago
  vim-fugitive

marcuskaz 1y ago

I suppose I want the article written for the experienced developer, convince me why I should try something different than the huge defacto standard that is git. I'm totally open to trying something new, but need a compelling case. Beyond `jj undo` everything else in this thread feels just as complicated as git.

baq 1y ago
do you know about git rerere? if yes, you might like jj.
- spooneybarger 1y ago
  This made me laugh. Thank you.
  - baq 1y ago
    It’s funny because it’s true! ;)
stavros 1y ago
There isn't a single thing in jj that's as complicated as git. I could go on to list a few features, but it would sound underwhelming, because you could do all that in git. It's kind of like asking "why would I buy a digital camera when my film camera does all the same things? I can already see what the photo will look like when I take it, and developing my own film isn't that much of a hassle", yet film cameras have gone the way of the dodo, except for the occasional nostalgic enthusiast.
- cortesoft 1y ago
  I don't think this is what the person you responded to is asking. Their question is more, "why would I buy a digital camera that takes pictures in a new format that only a few cameras understand? All my tooling, 3rd parties, and other camera I own use the standard format. Even though I can see why the new format has advantages, I am still going to have to use the other format for all these other photos I have to work with, and there aren't equivalent tools in the new format for all these other photos things I need to do. Even if I buy this new camera, I am still going to have to work with the old format, so I'll have to learn how to use two formats now, and get used to two tool chains. Since the existing format is something I am going to have to use either way, how is it worth it for me to have to use two formats?"

j2kun 1y ago

> more powerful than git > not missing out on power Two very different claims, and it only makes me more skeptical.