jj VS Git

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

GIT Version Control System

O sistema de versionamento de código mais utilizado, git

Git

> Because it was under 1000 layers of other bullshit

Not only because of that.

git-range-diff, while absolutely a killer feature, is a relatively new feature of git as well (a bit similarly to "git rebase --update-refs" -- which I've just learned of from you <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41511241>, so thanks for that :)).

Namely, git-range-diff existed out-of-tree as "git tbdiff" <https://github.com/trast/tbdiff> originally. It was ported to git proper in August 2018 <https://github.com/git/git/commit/d9c66f0b5bfd>; so it's not a feature people could have used "15 years ago".

(FWIW, before git-range-diff was a thing, and also before I had learned about git-tbdiff, I had developed a silly little script for myself, for doing nearly the same. Several other people did the same for themselves, too. Incremental review was vital for most serious maintainers, so it was a no-brainer to run "git format-patch" on two versions of a series, and colordiff those. The same workflow is essential for comparing a backport to the original (upstream) version of the series. Of course my stupid little script couldn't recognize reorderings of patches, or a subject line rewrite while the patch body stayed mostly the same.)

>> So it's hard for me to recommend tk for GUI development.

Tcl/Tk is widely used in lightweight legacy GUIs.

Python distributions will typically include tkinter (https://docs.python.org/3/library/tkinter.html) which is just a Python wrapper for Tk.

Git usually includes the gitk graphical utility which is written in Tcl/TK: https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/gitk-git/gitk

It's probably in use in other places, but those are two that quickly come to mind.

I agree that Tcl/Tk is probably not an ideal choice for new projects, but it has a long legacy, is quite stable and likely to be around, largely unchanged, for some time to come.

`git add` can be quite slow when handling large files, in large repositories, with a large index or on slow platforms. For instance this optimization in git brought the runtime of `git add .` on Windows with 200k files from 6s to 3s: https://github.com/git/git/commit/d1664e73ad96aa08735bf81d48....

100ms let alone 3s is much too long a wait, so Sublime Merge predicts the outcome of staging and presents that immediately. This made a noticeable improvement to responsiveness even on small repositories under Linux.

When you have the necessary dependencies, you can obtain the latest tagged Git release from several sources. The tarball is available at the kernel.org site (https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git) or the GitHub mirror (https://github.com/git/git/tags). The GitHub page typically provides clearer visibility into the latest version, while the kernel.org site offers release signatures for download verification.