I’ve started using Jujutsu recently and was surprised at how low friction it was to switch. If you’re like the author and keep hearing about it without giving it a shot, I suggest you just sit down and try it – it’s a lot less effort than you might expect.
roman_soldier · 19m ago
I tried Jujutsu on a simple repo and it ended up a mess I couldn't fix. Never had that with git. Might be my lack of knowledge but it shouldn't allow this.
Zambyte · 12m ago
jj undo, and jj op log && jj op restore can get you out of any trouble.
wirybeige · 1h ago
I think this is the first blog on JJ that has made me want to use it. The flow seems like it could be quite a bit better than git
WolfeReader · 2h ago
Jujutsu is so good. I'm using a megamerge workflow and absolutely loving it!
vlovich123 · 1h ago
How are these patch sets reviewed? Is there some mechanism for integrating with review systems like GitHub?
watusername · 1h ago
From git's perspective, jj bookmarks are just regular git branches, so you can just do `jj git push` and open a PR as usual.
However, unlike git, jj bookmarks are pinned to change IDs instead of immutable commit SHA-1s. This means that stacked PRs just work: Change something in the pr-1 bookmark, and all dependent bookmarks (pr-2, pr-3, ...) are automatically updated. A `jj git push --tracked` later and everything is pushed.
vlovich123 · 42m ago
And do downstream PRs show just what changed or is the merge target against main which then just keeps accumulating differences?
This is one of the strengths I appreciate about graphite which is that the PRs are always on the preceding branch but it knows that when you go to merge it should actually really retarget and merge against main.
jacobegold · 18m ago
(Graphite dev here)
Yeah – the key thing here is that there is work to be done on the server, so JJ likely either needs its own forge or a GitHub App that handles managing PRs for each JJ commit.
I'm a huge fan of the JJ paradigm – this is something I'd love for us to be able to do in the future once one or both of:
- we have more bandwidth to go down this road
- JJ is popular enough that its worthwhile for us to do
That said I'd also love to see if anyone in the community comes up with an elegant GH app for this!!
mac-monet · 2h ago
Just waiting for Jujutsu to support submodules and I can replace git completely.
IshKebab · 47m ago
I really hope they don't add submodule support. There's an opportunity to do something that works properly!
vinnyhaps · 3h ago
Follow along with Fintan as he details how he put his Git workflow into submission with Jujutsu and Radicle
frizlab · 1h ago
Yup. Still 0 incentive to try jj. I’m still very much convinced most of the problems solved by jj either do not exist or are already solved by recent features of git.
It’s good alternatives of popular tools exist but git would not be my first bet as a tool that needs fixing…
magnio · 59m ago
Why say yup to disagree with the premise of the article?
do_not_redeem · 57m ago
Some people just enjoy being contrarian.
I always enjoy how on jj articles, 90% of commenters tried it and switched, 10% never bothered to try it, and 0% tried it but decided not to switch.
homebrewer · 5m ago
You're reading an extremely biased sample of experiences. It's probably the opposite: 90% haven't tried it, 9% tried and didn't see any reason to switch, and around 1% have switched and won't shut up about it. For an advanced git user, it doesn't offer all that much. I used it for a couple of weeks and can't say that it saved me any time or any amount of work; it was either zero, or so close to zero that I wasn't able to notice it.
When Linus and his lieutenants switch over and recommend it as loudly as some do here, then I'll take another look. Very unlikely IMHO.
nocman · 21m ago
> Some people just enjoy being contrarian.
And some people just happen to disagree - doesn't automatically mean they just like "being contrarian". I took the "Yup..." to mean "this is what I was expecting, because it agrees with what I have seen before on this topic".
> I always enjoy how on jj articles, 90% of commenters tried it and switched, 10% never bothered to try it, and 0% tried it but decided not to switch.
And some unknown quantity of readers don't see anything compelling enough to either try it and/or comment on it after they have (or have not) tried it.
IshKebab · 44m ago
I dunno, I've tried it and I think I will stick with Git for a while longer at least. I really don't like the fact that it automatically commits changes in the working tree. Apparently you can turn it off but.. yeah I dunno.
I may change my mind. Especially if they provide a less shit alternative to submodules and LFS. (And I agree this guy is just being contrarian - jj definitely does fix some Git annoyances.)
However, unlike git, jj bookmarks are pinned to change IDs instead of immutable commit SHA-1s. This means that stacked PRs just work: Change something in the pr-1 bookmark, and all dependent bookmarks (pr-2, pr-3, ...) are automatically updated. A `jj git push --tracked` later and everything is pushed.
This is one of the strengths I appreciate about graphite which is that the PRs are always on the preceding branch but it knows that when you go to merge it should actually really retarget and merge against main.
Yeah – the key thing here is that there is work to be done on the server, so JJ likely either needs its own forge or a GitHub App that handles managing PRs for each JJ commit.
I'm a huge fan of the JJ paradigm – this is something I'd love for us to be able to do in the future once one or both of: - we have more bandwidth to go down this road - JJ is popular enough that its worthwhile for us to do
That said I'd also love to see if anyone in the community comes up with an elegant GH app for this!!
It’s good alternatives of popular tools exist but git would not be my first bet as a tool that needs fixing…
I always enjoy how on jj articles, 90% of commenters tried it and switched, 10% never bothered to try it, and 0% tried it but decided not to switch.
When Linus and his lieutenants switch over and recommend it as loudly as some do here, then I'll take another look. Very unlikely IMHO.
And some people just happen to disagree - doesn't automatically mean they just like "being contrarian". I took the "Yup..." to mean "this is what I was expecting, because it agrees with what I have seen before on this topic".
> I always enjoy how on jj articles, 90% of commenters tried it and switched, 10% never bothered to try it, and 0% tried it but decided not to switch.
And some unknown quantity of readers don't see anything compelling enough to either try it and/or comment on it after they have (or have not) tried it.
I may change my mind. Especially if they provide a less shit alternative to submodules and LFS. (And I agree this guy is just being contrarian - jj definitely does fix some Git annoyances.)