Pijul VS Gitless

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

One such project is the Gitless initiative which has a Python wrapper around Git proper providing far-simpler workflows based on some solid research. Unfortunately it doesn't look like Gitless' Python codebase has had active development recently, which doesn't inspire much confidence. - Source: dev.to / almost 2 years ago

You and me both. Git's interface has been very hard for me to understand (especially coming from Mercurial). I ended up finding Gitless (https://gitless.com), a wrapper around Git with a better interface, and loving it. - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago

> > To differentiate from Git Pijul should focus on usability... If Pijul has an easy to use interface like Mercurial did then that will massively help adoption. > I don't think the goal or differentiation of pijul is to be popular via good UI, though. If the theory of patches is good, it doesn't matter if pijul "wins" or not, as long as whatever does can integrate it. If the theory of patches is bad, I... - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

I'd like to think it was my project (https://github.com/martinvonz/jj), but other possibilities include Gitless (https://gitless.com/) or Bazaar (https://bazaar.canonical.com/). - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

Gitless [1] has already been mentioned in another comment here. [2] That makes it easier to use hit for those who are not as experienced or haven’t learned about the internals of git. For a different model (and other types of workflows), consider Fossil SCM. [3] Here’s a comparison of fossil with git, and what these tools are a good fit for. [4] I found fossil easier to understand, relatively speaking, and it... - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago