3 ms·
Personally I don't think adding a layer on top of git is a good idea. I know it's hard to break git's hegemony but it would be much more powerful and less cons
by hu3 1y ago
Personally I don't think adding a layer on top of git is a good idea.
I know it's hard to break git's hegemony but it would be much more powerful and less constrained to build on top of a new foundation.
- dcre 1y agojj’s design is not constrained by git. git is one possible backend, but you don’t even need to use jj with git. I will eat a shoe if you can name something jj is prevented from doing by its relation to git.
- hu3 1y agoInteresting. How can I use jj without git?
- tfsh 1y agoRight now there's no active public backends, there are a few prolific JJ contributors who are working on their own forge though (https://ersc.io https://ersc.io). At Google, JJ is natively supported for interfacing with the monorepo, this is where the proof of being backend agnostic comes from. Hopefully as the network effects catches on we'll see more and more of a desire for 3P forges.
- KingMob 1y agoYou might be interested in pijul then, which has a theory of patches that is interesting.
- SAI_Peregrinus 1y agoGit is a content-addressable filesystem with a VCS interface on top of it. jj needs a content-addressable filesystem for a backend, and currently only uses git's implementation in released versions, but the devs are working on their own to serve as a "native" backend. At least in theory, just about any content-addressable filesystem could be used, e.g. IPFS, though many would not be efficient.