Pijul VS BitKeeper

In Pijul, conflicts are not modelled as a "failure to merge", but rather as the standard case. Specifically, conflicts happen between two changes, and are solved by one change. The resolution change solves the conflict between the same two changes, no matter if other changes have been made concurrently. Once solved, conflicts never come back. - from https://pijul.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 2 months ago

Do not try and bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth...there is no spoon. Then you will see it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself -- what Pijul users say when they overhear git users arguing with each other about monorepos. https://pijul.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 2 months ago

I believe that handling merges like this correctly was a motive for designing pijul: https://pijul.org See the item on the splash page about 'merge correctness'. Unfortunately I wasn't able to find the post detailing the behavior with a bit of searching. - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago

Darcs [0] patch theory was a predecessor to OTs/CRDTs (and a predecessor to git as well; in some ways it is the "smart" to which git was named "dumb"). When it works and performs well it is still sometimes version control magic. Pijul [1] is an interesting experiment to watch, trying to keep the patch theory flag flying and also trying to bring in updates from OTs and CRDTs as it can. [0] https://darcs.net [1]... - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago

IMHO the only really interesting alternative to Git currently is Pijul (https://pijul.org) as it is not a more-or-less Git clone but a different approach to the problem itself. Pijul allows for very interesting development and ci/cd workflows. - Source: Hacker News / 3 months ago

If you're feeling adventurous, [bitkeeper](https://bitkeeper.org) handles binaries well. - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago