11 ms·

I absolutely love jj (just check my HN comment history). One thing I'd love to see in jj though that git does better is copy tracking. If somebody renames a fil

by tcoff91 15d ago

I absolutely love jj (just check my HN comment history). One thing I'd love to see in jj though that git does better is copy tracking. If somebody renames a file upstream, and you go to rebase your commit that touches that file onto main, jj doesn't handle this very well compared to git. Do you have any idea if this is coming to jj soon?

drsouth 15d ago
Do you happen to have or know of any good open source projects on any public platform like GitHub, gitlab or Codeberg, that uses Jujutsu/jj?
- nomel 15d ago
  jj uses git as a backend. None of those need to "use" jj. You can use jj in an existing git repo, with your git wielding friends.
- okoddcat 15d ago
  Checkout Gisia https://github.com/gisiahq/gisia https://github.com/gisiahq/gisia
- nickisnoble 15d ago
  It's hard to tell since any given dev can just use jj locally, if they want to, while everyone else uses git.
  - dzaima 15d ago
    Technically, you can still tell actually - jj writes a "change-id xyz..." in the git commit object header, which remains there as it's pushed around. It's just typically not made visible by regular things. (I wonder what other random garbage has been hidden in git commit headers that noone has seen)
    - OJFord 15d ago
      Huh, fortunate for it that GitHub (especially) preserves it then! I wonder how guaranteed that is, can imagine GH deciding to 'clean' it (how much data can you put there theoretically? Or to close a range of potential security issues) and suddenly relatively niche but genuine uses like jj's change-id are unintentionally not preserved.
      - dzaima 15d ago
        Cleaning it would change the commit ID, so a forge cannot clean it even if it wanted to (not without rewriting all descendant commits too and breaking signed commits, at least). The change-id is exactly as much part of the commit object as the author/committer name/timestamp, description, parent commit ID, tree, and participates in the commit hashing as those do.
      - steveklabnik 15d ago
        Various git commands can drop the metadata, so it’s not guaranteed to stick around.
  - pkulak 15d ago
    All my prs are named phil-<hash> and have been for years now. I keep waiting for someone to care/notice, but no one has.
- underdeserver 15d ago
  If I remember correctly, Mitchell Hashimoto uses it for Ghostty (probably under the git backend).
steveklabnik 15d ago
There is active work in this area, yes! https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/3386 https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/3386 is the bug tracking the feature request, and there have been some recent PRs working on implementing this, see here for one example: https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/pull/9864 https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/pull/9864

by tcoff91 15d ago

drsouth 15d ago

Do you happen to have or know of any good open source projects on any public platform like GitHub, gitlab or Codeberg, that uses Jujutsu/jj?

nomel 15d ago
jj uses git as a backend. None of those need to "use" jj. You can use jj in an existing git repo, with your git wielding friends.
okoddcat 15d ago
Checkout Gisia https://github.com/gisiahq/gisia https://github.com/gisiahq/gisia
nickisnoble 15d ago
It's hard to tell since any given dev can just use jj locally, if they want to, while everyone else uses git.
- dzaima 15d ago
  Technically, you can still tell actually - jj writes a "change-id xyz..." in the git commit object header, which remains there as it's pushed around. It's just typically not made visible by regular things. (I wonder what other random garbage has been hidden in git commit headers that noone has seen)
  - OJFord 15d ago
    Huh, fortunate for it that GitHub (especially) preserves it then! I wonder how guaranteed that is, can imagine GH deciding to 'clean' it (how much data can you put there theoretically? Or to close a range of potential security issues) and suddenly relatively niche but genuine uses like jj's change-id are unintentionally not preserved.
    - dzaima 15d ago
      Cleaning it would change the commit ID, so a forge cannot clean it even if it wanted to (not without rewriting all descendant commits too and breaking signed commits, at least). The change-id is exactly as much part of the commit object as the author/committer name/timestamp, description, parent commit ID, tree, and participates in the commit hashing as those do.
    - steveklabnik 15d ago
      Various git commands can drop the metadata, so it’s not guaranteed to stick around.
- pkulak 15d ago
  All my prs are named phil-<hash> and have been for years now. I keep waiting for someone to care/notice, but no one has.
underdeserver 15d ago
If I remember correctly, Mitchell Hashimoto uses it for Ghostty (probably under the git backend).

steveklabnik 15d ago

There is active work in this area, yes! https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/3386 https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/3386 is the bug tracking the feature request, and there have been some recent PRs working on implementing this, see here for one example: https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/pull/9864 https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/pull/9864