lowboy · HackerTrans

7 miesięcy temudiscuss

It does via snapshot.auto-track https://docs.jj-vcs.dev/latest/config/#paths-to-automaticall...

7 miesięcy temudiscuss

Being responsible for something while having little/no control is so demoralizing & infuriating.

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

If you're looking to model git branches as much as possible with jj bookmarks and assume that:

- the working copy has a bookmark pointing to it

- there's some ancestor with a bookmark

- there's a single linear path between the two with no other bookmarks in between

Here's an example that represents a branch containing 3 commits named "bookmark-05ff" branched off of "bookmark-6825".

    > jj log -r y:: -T builtin_log_redacted
    @  urplyywu user-482a 2025-10-23 13:24:52 bookmark-05ff a334e2e1
    │  (empty) (redacted)
    ○  lxxtnlxw user-482a 2025-10-23 13:24:46 git_head() 7e32fa6b
    │  (empty) (redacted)
    ○  omktyuos user-482a 2025-10-23 13:24:13 7668b0bb
    │  (empty) (redacted)
    ○  ykzktoux user-7b7f 2025-10-23 13:23:47 bookmark-6825 98bfcbde
    │  (empty) (redacted)
    ~

In this case, the following log would get you the commit pointed to by "bookmark-6825":

    > jj log -r 'latest(ancestors(@) & bookmarks(), 2) ~ @' -T builtin_log_redacted
    ○  ykzktoux user-7b7f 2025-10-23 13:23:47 bookmark-6825 98bfcbde
    │  (empty) (redacted)
    ~

I'm using the builtin_log_redacted output template. Normally you'd have actual bookmark names, descriptions, user, etc.

Also note this bakes in a lot of assumptions and is brittle. As many others have said, it’s not generalizable.

lowboy

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

Ah, yes that reading of the “work is invisible” is likely.

lowboy

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

> You can't do jj this, jj that, jj other, jj undo, jj undo, jj undo AFIACT

You can as of v0.33.0[0]. Previous behaviour was that `jj undo; jj undo` would leave you where you started (it undid the undo).

> The biggest issue for me is it requires active change management (or feels like it). In git I do `git checkout foo` then I start editing. If I want to see what may changes are since foo then `git diff` tells me. With jj though, `jj edit foo` is the to git, state of the repo ALL changes to foo. So any new edits are invisible. So, instead of `jj edit` I have to do `jj edit` `jj new`, then later squash those into foo

I'm not 100% clear on what you mean here, but a few things that might help:

1. In jj you don't "checkout" a branch, you edit a specific commit. That commit might be pointed to by a bookmark but it doesn't have to be. A jj bookmark is roughly equivalent to what git calls a branch. Note that a git branch, and a jj bookmark are just pointers to a commit, as illustrated here[1]).

2. If you want to resume work on a branch/bookmark instead of `git checkout BRANCHNAME` you'd do `jj new BRANCHNAME` which puts a new commit on top of the commit and sets it as a working copy.

3. Bookmarks don't auto advance like they do in git. So adding new commits on top of a "branch" will leave the bookmark where it is until you `jj bookmark set/move` it. So you could squash commits down into the "foo" bookmark, but you could also move "foo" to point to subsequent commits.

4. Not sure what you mean by edits being invisible, but if it's seeing a diff from main to the tip of your branch (with a change id of ex. XYZ) it would be `jj diff -f main -t XYZ`.

0: https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md#0330---2...

1: https://social.jvns.ca/@b0rk/111709462585184810

lowboy

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

Another good sales pitch is `jj undo`[0]. It puts the repo back to previous state, regardless of what the mutative operation was. It's a powerful and simple safety net that unlocks experimentation.

It does this by adding an new operation on top of the operation log[1], so you don't lose repository states by moving up + down the op log. There's a corresponding `jj redo` as well.

0: https://jj-vcs.github.io/jj/latest/cli-reference/#jj-undo

1: https://jj-vcs.github.io/jj/latest/operation-log/

lowboy

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

Your response conflates the categories of people and ignores that statements like "people..." can mean "(some|most|all) people..." in casual writing/speech. It is not a fair response.

I agree with your frustration with the framing that _all_ people who like the act and craftsmanship feel AI is negative, and the consequence that if one does like AI, then they must not like the act of craftsmanship. Many such people view it as a tool, Mitchell included.

lowboy

7 lat temudiscuss

Wear an Apple watch on the other arm?

lowboy

11 lat temudiscuss

I was expecting something very different from the word "koans". IMO, "React.js exercises" would be a better title for the project.

comments