Yes, the result is (almost) just regular Git commits, so there isn't anything jj can do that Git cannot do. It's just often a lot easier to do it with jj.

A lot of jj users are former Git power users. If all you do you use is `git clone`, `git commit -A`, `git push`, `git pull`, then there's much less to gain for you from switching.

Since you seem to know how to use interactive rebase, I think you are the target audience.

To clarify what's easier in the scenario mentioned above:

1. You don't need to check out a specific branch to start the interactive rebase from. You simply check out the commit you want to edit and then squash into.

2. You don't have to manually rebase other descendant branches. (I.e. if the commit you're modifying is in multiple branches.)

3. Branches (jj calls them bookmarks) get automatically updated. I know Git now has `--update-refs`, but you never need pass that with jj (maybe Git has a config for it, I haven't checked).

4. If you had a dirty working copy before you decided to fix up this commit, you won't need to manually stash or commit those changes.

5. If editing the commit results in conflicts in some descendant, you don't have to resolve those right away.

Try it and let us know how it goes?