JJ might be good (this article couldn't convey why in the "What is jj and why should I care?" page) but it's not 10x better than git, so it will likely die. Sorry, nothing personal, Mercurial/hg was a little bit better than git and died too. Network effects.

What has a change is ast-based version control.

You adding a feature to a function that uses a struct I renamed shouldn't be a conflict. Those actions don't confliuct with each other, unless you treat code as text - rather than a representation of the logic.

Ending merge conflicts might make a new version control 10x better than git, and therefore actually replace it.

▲

saghm 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> JJ might be good (this article couldn't convey why in the "What is jj and why should I care?" page) but it's not 10x better than git, so it will likely die. Sorry, nothing personal, Mercurial/hg was a little bit better than git and died too. Network effects.

The difference is that I can (and do) use `jj` with existing git repos today without needing anyone else using the repo to change what they're doing. There's no need to replace something when it can exist alongside it indefinitely.

	▲	cageface 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Unless you need to work with a repo that uses submodules or lfs.

▲

Nuzzerino 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Did you confirm that the network effects are applicable here before posting that?

	▲	nailer 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nope. As mentioned "What is jj and why should I care?" didn't cover it and I timeboxed jj advocacy to the page that says it will get me to care.