can you elaborate please? Why jj is more feature complete for you than git? I tried jj and for now it looks like too raw. The problem is also its git backed. I really don't want to care about two states of repo at the same time - one is my local jj, and another is remote git repo.

I think jj just has other conceptions compared to git. E.g. in git you probably will not change history too much (if pushed to remote especially), while in jj simple editing of commits is a front feature. So, comparing them in feature completeness looks strange to me

After some experience with jj I understand that jj is a user-oriented, user friendly tool with batteries included, while git is double-edged knife which is also highly customizable

Or if you use its predecessor, bitkeeper.