mergestat-lite VS jj

You can query git with this: https://github.com/mergestat/mergestat if you like the idea.

Hey, author here, happy to answer any questions! Also checkout this notebook for a deeper dive into sqlite-lines, along with a slick WASM demonstration and more thoughts on the codebase itself https://observablehq.com/@asg017/introducing-sqlite-lines

I really dig SQLite, and I believe SQLite extensions will push it to another level. I rarely reach for Pandas or other "traditional" tools and query languages, and instead opt for plain ol' SQLite and other extensions. As a shameless plug, I recently started a blog series on SQLite and related tools and extensions if you want to learn more! Next week I'll be publishing more SQLite extensions for parsing HTML + making HTTP requests https://observablehq.com/@asg017/a-new-sqlite-blog-series

A few other SQLite extensions:

- xlite, for reading Excel files, in Rust https://github.com/x2bool/xlite

- sqlean, several small SQLite extensions in C https://github.com/nalgeon/sqlean

- mergestat, several SQLite extensions for developers (mainly Github's API) in Go https://github.com/mergestat/mergestat

mergestat is an open-source tool that allows users to run SQL queries on the contents and history of git repositories.

Thanks for this write up! I've been really interested in postgres compatibility in the context of a tool I maintain (https://github.com/mergestat/mergestat) that uses SQLite. I've been looking for a way to expose the SQLite capabilities over a more commonly used wire-protocol like postgres (or mysql) so that existing BI and visualization tools can access the data.

This project is an interesting one: https://github.com/dolthub/go-mysql-server that provides a MySQL interface (wire and SQL) to arbitrary "backends" implemented in go.

It's really interesting how compatibility with existing protocols has become an important feature of new databases - there's so much existing tooling that already speaks postgres (or mysql), being able to leverage that is a huge advantage IMO

timediff is a Go package for printing human readable, relative time differences. Output is based on ranges defined in the Day.js JavaScript library, and can be customized if needed. It's currently used by the mergestat command-line interface.

Assuming committers adhere to it, there could be some interesting use cases when combined with a tool like AskGit (https://github.com/askgitdev/askgit) for understanding what "categories" of work is being done in a codebase.

Maybe even what directories/files tend to see `fix` or `refactor` more frequently (signs of a poorly design or "hot" area?)

I've been very curious to explore this type of use case with askgit (https://github.com/augmentable-dev/askgit) which was designed for running simple "slice and dice" queries and aggregations on git history (and change stats) for basic analytical purposes. I've been curious about how this could be applied to a small text+git based "db". Say, for a regular json or CSV dumps.

This also reminds me of Dolt: https://github.com/dolthub/dolt which I believe has been on HN a couple times

Jujutsu is along the lines of what you describe: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

You can drop it in and work seamlessly from git repos

Pull Requests (or Merge Requests) are merged only when (1) all of the automated tests pass; and (2) enough necessary reviewers have indicated approval.

Git doesn't tell you when it's necessary to have full test coverage and manual infosec review in development cycles that produce releases, and neither do Pull Requests.

https://westurner.github.io/hnlog/#comment-19552164 ctrl-f hubflow

It looks like datasift's gitflow/hubflow docs are 404'ing, but the original nvie blog post [1] has the Git branching workflow diagrams; which the wpsharks/hubflow fork [3] of datasift/gitflow fork [2] of gitflow [1]has a copy of in the README:

[1] https://github.com/nvie/gitflow

[2] https://github.com/datasift/gitflow

[3] https://github.com/wpsharks/hubflow?tab=readme-ov-file

https://learngitbranching.js.org/ is still a great resource, and it could work on mobile devices.

The math of VCS deltas and mutable and immutable content-addressed DAG nodes identified by 2^n bits describing repo/$((2*inf)) bits ;

>> "ugit – Learn Git Internals by Building Git in Python" https://www.leshenko.net/p/ugit/

SLSA.dev is a social construct atop e.g. git, which is really a low-level purpose-built tool and Perl and now Python porcelain.

jj (jujutsu) is a git-compatible VCS CLI: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

"Ask HN: Best Git workflow for small teams" (2016)

You will probably like Jujutsu, which takes much inspiration from Mercurial: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

It isn't a 1-to-1 clone, either. But tools like revsets are there, cset evolution is "built in" to the design, etc. There is no concept of phases, we might think about adding that, but there is a concept of immutable commits (so you don't overwrite public ones.)

It also has many novel features that make it stand out. We care a lot about performance and usability. Give it a shot. I think you might be pleasantly surprised.

Disclosure: I am a developer of Jujutsu. I do it in my spare time.

I have created a discussion. Thank you both

https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/discussions/2691

> why don't version control systems (especially ones that can change history) have undo/redo functionality out of the box?

It's true. And Jujutsu has undo functionality out of the box, too. It's not just Sapling. :) https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

Git made the only choice a popular VCS can make. History rewrites will exist, period. If you're opposed to history rewrites, then git gives you the tools to ensure the repos you control are not rewritten, and that's all it can do in a world where people have control of their own computers.

If Fossil ever becomes as popular as git, people will create software that allows history rewriting in Fossil, and that's fine. People will do what they want on their own computer, and I think it's morally wrong to try and stop that.

Another user in this thread linked to jj [0], an alternative git client that does some pretty weird things. For example, it replaces the working tree with a working commit and commits quite often. I like git and that seems weird to me, but I'm not offended, people can do what they want on their own computer and I have the tools to ensure repos under my control are not effected. That's all I can hope for.

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

I recently found out about another project called jj: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj. It takes inspiration from Pijul and others but is git-compatible.

https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

I think maybe both fossil and bitkeeper are more intuitive too.

Did you try any of those?