git-issue VS jj

Note that if you just want to provide a issue tracker within Git rather than relying on centralized web services like Github or Gitlab, there is

https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue

https://sciit.gitlab.io/sciit/ (this one has a list of alternatives here https://sciit.gitlab.io/sciit/#other-distributed-issue-track...)

Overall it's very disappointing that Github didn't decide to embed issue tracking (and also PR discussions) inside the repository (in another branch perhaps). Issue discussion is part of documentation IMO, and not distributing it alongside the repository causes lock-in

A quick search for 'issue tracker stored in git repository' brings up this Stackoverflow post, which points to git-bug and git-issue. Those look closer to what you're asking for, thought I haven't used them.

I think he meant just the network effects of a social platform. Github has more people in them so there are more people interacting with repositories hosted on Github.

I wish that somehow people carried identity across Github / Gitlab / Gitea / other services. Like, a federated issue tracker. Or otherwise that the issues themselves were easily movable between platforms, with no lock-in. But the incumbent platforms rarely want something like this.

An alternative is to eschew platform issues entirely, and use decentralized issue comments hosted as Git repositories, like https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue or https://github.com/neithernut/git-dit or https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug - I think that Gitlab should offer integration with one of them. I mean: both allowing to export issues and PRs into a Git branch, and allowing people to comment on issues and PRs by pushing to a Git branch.

git-bug, the one mentioned in the article here, has some documentation on its README of how well its importer/exporter tools support Github, Gitlab, Jira, and Launchpad: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

Most of the other such tools I've seen barely have the resources to import/export a single such API. git-issue only has Github import it looks like. https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue

There's perceval which is designed to be a generic archival tool and supports lots of APIs, but only dumps them to source-specific formats and would still need a lot of work if you tried to use issues from different APIs together: https://github.com/chaoss/grimoirelab-perceval

I'm just going to drop a casual shout-out to jujutsu[1]. It's 100% git-compatible—you can mix and match jj and git commands whenever needed, and your coworkers never need know you're using something else—but it elegantly solves things like rebase/merge conflicts (and solves a lot of other sharp edges in git at the same time).

It is one of those rare birds that is both more powerful than the tool that it replaces while also being drastically easier to use. I am (was?) a git power user, and it took me all of a day to replace git with jj, and the rest of the week to become essentially as fluent. I will never go back.

[1] https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

In some cases, yes, but I think the way jj handles conflicts is easier to follow. You can see the conflict resolution in `jj diff` and you can rebase it like a regular commit. rerere's state is harder to understand, I think. See https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/issues/175#issuecomment-107... for some more discussion.

This will be easier with jujutsu(https://github.com/martinvonz/jj)?

We strongly considered Graphite as an alternative to Gerrit at my last job that I mentioned at the start of this post (which I am no longer at, actually) because it does look like an absolutely excellent product, I will admit. You should all be proud of a smart design and smart set of tools.

But there's a really really really really really really big problem. Me and the other main engineer on our team use a custom frontend to Git called Jujutsu[1] for all my development. Jujutsu is about 1000x better than Git. So that's nice.

But gt, the graphite client, is not open source. I have no idea how to make them work together. I have no idea how to extend Jujutsu to handle Graphite stacks, because I don't even think there's an API to handle any of this.

I even wrote a Gerrit integration for Jujutsu to handle this, and Gerrit + Jujutsu is absolutely a force to be reckoned with IMO, even if the UX isn't as nice as Graphite's.

Please! Make gt open source and make it possible for third parties to make and update stacks. This isn't just useful for jj but all kinds of automation that wants to contribute patches -- imagine tools like Google's internal "Code Review ML models" that might recommend you rename a variable based on context. They will suggest the fix for you or even apply it!

[1] https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

Honestly, that's less keystrokes than adding a shellAlias. If you aren't sold on using nix to manage your system's configuration, this seems overcomplicated. If you use nix, then you are already probably frustrated at keeping your nix configuration in sync with quick little optimizations you do on a regular basis. With nix, everything is source controlled. If you are a dotfiler, then you would still have to commit your changes. I guess that's true in my solution as well. The git add in my update is probably the most dubious element of this entire schrade. That is unless, you are using jj.

I completely missed the `` argument despite being the first thing documented under `jj log`. That's definitely the most critical feature out of my list, thank you for pointing that out!

Also, it's great to hear that you're willing to accept contributions for those features. If/when Jujutsu gains critical mass, I imagine that someone will end up contributing these features.

Regarding rename detection, it seems like that is actively being worked on, which is really encouraging! https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/pull/3574

martinvoz/jj: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj :

> Working-copy-as-a-commit: Changes to files are recorded automatically as normal commits, and amended on every subsequent change. This "snapshot" design simplifies the user-facing data model (commits are the only visible object), simplifies internal algorithms, and completely subsumes features like Git's stashes or the index/staging-area.