Post B6YaWT38mgrmIBq9po by b0rk@jvns.ca
(DIR) More posts by b0rk@jvns.ca
(DIR) Post #B6YaWSXafzd4iL4xeq by b0rk@jvns.ca
0 likes, 0 repeats
i've been trying out jj and one thing I struggle with is that my workspace feels very... messy? In Git often I have 20 semi-abandoned branches that I might come back to later in 6 months later if I want to.but in jj I don't know how to mark a change as "I don't need you to show this to me in `jj log` but I also don't want to abandon it"so far i've been using jj on a project for short bursts if I need to rebase a lot and then I go back to Git
(DIR) Post #B6YaWSqjWowRfi2FUm by shapr@recurse.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@b0rk perhaps edit your definition of "jj log" to only show your recent history? I have a "jj todo" query that shows me changes that are 'leaves', not connected to 'main', and more than two weeks old. I'm becoming convinced the jj query language is a big part of the tool's power.
(DIR) Post #B6YaWT38mgrmIBq9po by b0rk@jvns.ca
0 likes, 0 repeats
@shapr hm yeah that makes sense and it's cool you can do that but recently I'm moving more and more towards using tools that require 0 configuration (like fish, helix, etc) and I think I don't really have the patience for that kind of fiddling with configuration right nowi'm a bit jealous of people who can invent subcommands and workflows for themselves like this :)
(DIR) Post #B6YaWTEq5CDwsTJV4K by demize@unstable.systems
0 likes, 0 repeats
@b0rk yeah jj is very... opinionated, in how it's configured by defaultand if you can get used to how it's configured by default or take the time to configure it then it can be fantastic, but otherwise it's probably just going to be a struggle. it's fairly unique among this kind of tool (the opinionated-but-configurable kind) in that it's both really powerful by default and incredibly configurable, but that whole class of tool is one I often find hard to recommend even if I like it a lot