[flagged]
I respect your opinion, but I don't think it's a fact and I couldn't disagree any further with it. I wrote a whole testimonial about why I love jj (first one there): https://jj-vcs.github.io/jj/latest/testimonials/#what-the-us...
> it's impractical for most working programmers to switch
I don't know what you mean here. I think it's quite practical to switch to jj, and people switch over all the time. Some people are going to be earlier adopters than others, but the early adopters can bring others along (as I've been lucky to do at Oxide).
> focus on something whose main appeal is more than social
Steve and I both think that Jujutsu's appeal is far more than merely some bandwagon effect. I do think that social appeal is an important part of making a project succeed, and that projects without substantial technical merit win due to social appeal all the time, but Jujutsu has both! It's amazing!
Thank you for charitably responding to the substance of my comment and especially not whatever tone you may have perceived. I appreciate you.
I know I did. The fact I can use it with git and it doesn’t interfere with any GitHub PR workflows means no-one needs to know I use it. I enjoy the jj model. Maybe you could too, and it’s not a crazy investment of time and energy. It’s an evening playing around with a code kata or something.
Then working with vcs becomes that little bit more enjoyable.
Not a thing in here is true, especially not objectively true. As neutral as you may believe yourself, it might be a good time to step back and reexamine your priors that led you to state so confidently that there’s no usability reason to switch in particular.
The key word I used is "substantial." The usability improvements over Git are marginal and if they ever become non-marginal, they can relatively easily be added to git. This is what my comment is getting at. The only essential difference between Git and JJ is that they are different fiefdoms. There is no substantial technological difference. It's just two different social factions with marginally different opinions about how to type CLI commands.
JJ might produce commits that can be stored in Git, but the affordances are different. If Git wants to adopt them, it becomes no longer Git.
On the other hand, I'm happily using JJ while everyone I collaborate with is using Git. JJ doesn't need to "win" to be useful, it just needs to be useful enough that the people who maintain it continue to maintain it.
It's trivial that JJ can't do anything `git` can't do, because JJ uses Git as a backend, so everything it does it does via `git`. But Git the project is extremely unlikely to alter `git` the tool to provide JJ's interface, and even if they did via namespacing it (e.g. `git jj commit`, `git jj git init --colocate`, etc.) that'd just be adding even more commands on top of the existing interface with too many commands.
Not in my experience. jj is easy to pick up and a joy to use. I like git. I deeply appreciate git. But git can feel like snow shoveling sometimes, while in jj things just click into place.
jj is freeing, because things that were a hassle before are now easy, and other things that were impossible are also easy.
I know there's a lot of hype around for a lot of things, and I get grumpy from all of it. Jujutsu is one of the few things that actually deserve the praise being heaped on them.
You may disagree, of course. But I hope that some day, you'll have reason to be happy about this tool, instead of feeling... whatever touched you off like this.
Yet still, the status quo is not Subversion and SourceForge, both of which have been relegated to antiquity, but git and GitHub.
Will something else unseat git and GitHub in the coming years? And will it be Jujutsu or some other innovation on version control?
Who knows, but I see no need to be so dismissive of somebody’s passion in such an arrogant way.
sounds like someone hasn't used jujutsu
But as we say on Hackernews, there are two kinds of people with respect to jj: those who love it, and those who haven't tried it.
Doing the same thing, but with better usability, is immensely valuable. Remember, Hackernews thought Dropbox was "just" ssh+rsync, but they made a billion dollars making that easy.
Every magit user disagrees with you.
> and it's impractical for most working programmers to switch
This very much sounds like someone who has never even tried jj. Tell us: What makes switching impractical?
> My well-intentioned recommendation to Steve, because I've been there, is: If you want to avoid feeling like you've wasted your life in a few years on code that doesn't live up to its promise and is essentially no different than the code that already exists in Git (and Hg, Pijul, Fossil, etc.),
Is Steve even a developer for jj?
I am assuming that this new job will change that.