Beads is cool, but I tried to use it, and the backend didn't really make sense. I have to run an sql database in the background? How does it sync with Git? (I didn't see any files/objects committed to the repo) Plus, Dolt ended up using a constant 3-30kB/s of i/o in the background, while nothing was actually going on. That and Beads has a lot of features I'm not gonna use. All of this was just too complicated for my tiny brain.

So I slapped together my own Beads implementation (https://codeberg.org/mutablecc/dingles) over a day or two. Probably has bugs, and I'm sure race conditions if you tried to use with Gas Town, and likely does not scale. But it has the minimum functionality needed to create and track issues and sync them (locally and remotely, either via normal merge, or a dedicated ticket branch). No SQL, no extra features, just JSONL and Git. Threw a whole large software project at it, and the AI took to it like a duck to water, used it to make epics for the whole project, methodically worked through them all, dependencies first, across multiple context sessions. The paradigm of making tools the AI wants to use is clearly a winner.

Agreed that beads seems way over engineered for an issue tracker.

Glad I'm not the only one using Gastown as a space heater. I filed an issue here and hope to find some time this week to research more: https://github.com/dolthub/dolt/issues/10849

I did the same thing, and had the same experience, but it also gave more of an appreciation for Beads' architecture. I think the weird redundancies actually made a lot of sense when I began to understand some of the edge cases where agents crap the bed.