> If I could only maintain code I wrote, I'd have to work alone.
I don't think that "Code you did not write is code you do not understand" implies that the only way to understand code is to write it. I can read code, run it, debug it and figure out how it works.
It's true that all of that is possible with AI generated code. But the thing is, is it worth for me spending time understanding that PR, when I can make the change or launch my own agent to prompt it myself? At least with my own prompt I know exactly what I want it to be.
It seems like something like this should be added to the commit object/message itself, instead of git notes. Maybe as addition to Co-Authored-By trailer.
This would make sure this data is part of repository history (and commit SHA). Additional tooling can be still used to visualize it.
I see this doesn't use <textarea> or contenteditable, I'm curious how close can it get to native controls or can this replace them? Things like mouse selection and usual hot keys like Cmd+A and maybe other things.
I'm building a new Git hosting service focused on performance and great UX. It's another take on source code hosting and patch sharing, with some nice features like stacked diffs, automatically protected branches.
Currently just the cloud hosted version (https://gitncoffee.com), but plan to open-source most of it when it's more complete.
the engine cannot brake to a complete stop, so break pads are always in use. At low RPMs, the engine is going to stall (manual) or switch to neutral (automatic).
I actually prefer limited content width for prose content. Full width content on wide screens requires moving eyes all the way from one side to another for every line.
I'm working on a new type of git forge[1], optimized for speed and work with patches.
It goes to extreme lengths to ensure great performance, i.e. rewritten most server-side parts of git from scratch, so there is no "exec"-ing git nor calls to libraries like libgit2. The frontend should also be very fast thanks for HTMX.
Gitpatch attempts to solve this. Supports versioned patches and patch stacks (aka stacked PRs). Also handles force-pushes in stacks correctly even without Change-IDs using heuristics based on title, author date etc. It should also be unusually fast. Disclosure: I'm the author.
I'm not convinced that review comments as commits make thing easier, but I think storing them in git in some way is a good idea (i.e. git annotations or in commit messages after merge etc)
> in that every software engineer now depends heavily on copilots
With many engineers using copilots and since LLMs output the most frequent patterns, it's possible that more and more software is going to look the same, which would further reinforce the same patterns.
For example, emdash thing, requires additional prompts and instructions to override it. Doing anything unusual would require more effort.
Gitpatch attempts to build a Git hosting with native support for patches and commit-based review system, where each commit is its own patch. It's also smart to handle force pushes and can update or reorder patches as needed.
I'll plug another option Gitpatch, however it's pretty early beta and not open-source yet, but most likely will be under AGPL at some point. It has built-in patch stacks (aka stacked PRs) and probably faster than any other Git host out there.
disclosure: I'm the author.
Codeberg UI appears to be pretty similar to GitHub, so it's great as GitHub alternative. It's powered by Forgejo, fork of Gitea.
Gitpatch is a bit different. It implements a new storage backend and Git library from scratch. It also uses patch-based model for code review vs pull requests, where specially-named branches are used to submit patches and patch stacks.
I usually leave them as uncommitted changes, then git checkout to undo them. And using something like `git add -p` to skip Printfs if I need to commit other changes.
Git hosting for async teams that supports versioned patches and patch stacks instead of pull requests. All done using the standard git SSH protocol, so no git-send-email needed.
I imagine this can very useful for Go-based forges that need syntax highlighting (i.e. Gitea, Forgejo).
I have a strict no-cgo requirement, so I might use it in my project, which is Git+JJ forge https://gitncoffee.com.