Pijul Reviews and Details

Social recommendations and mentions

• A Coherent Vision for the Future of Version Control

  I will look at it, it seems interesting. However, I hope a better ending than Pyjul (https://pijul.org/). I'm no longer waiting for it whereas everything sound awesome : quite no more merge conflict and patches order free. So sad it still something not production ready. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

• A Coherent Vision for the Future of Version Control

  Pijul does both. It's a VCS, that is a CRDT, that preserves conflicts until a human resolves them. Look it up: https://pijul.org. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

• A Coherent Vision for the Future of Version Control

  When you say "unit of work", unit of _which_ work are you referring to? The problem with rebasing is that it takes one set of snapshots and replays them on top of another set, so you end up with two "equivalent" units of work. In fact they're _the same_ indeed -- the tree objects are shared, except that if by "work" you mean changes, Git is going to tell you two different histories, obviously. This is in contrast... - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

• A Coherent Vision for the Future of Version Control

  The canonical website is https://pijul.org. The homepage has a link to the pijul source repository. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

• I made my own Git

  Much more principled (and hence less of a foot-gun) way of handling conflicts is making them first class objects in the repository, like https://pijul.org does. - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago

• GitHub is no longer independent at Microsoft after CEO resignation

  There's a lot that could be improved with conflict resolution and merge trains/stacked merges. See https://pijul.org for what's possible but not available in git. - Source: Hacker News / 12 months ago

• Evo: Version control that works the way you think

  Obligatory link to https://pijul.org/ which I’d say also fits the description - in which you really commit patches instead of whole trees and patches are pretend. - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• I'm daily driving Jujutsu, and maybe you should too

  Simplicity is in the eye of the beholder but Pijul[0] claims to be "easy to learn and use". [0] https://pijul.org/. - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• Ask HN: If you were rewriting Emacs from scratch, what would you do differently?

  >> see jujutsu nowadays I'm looking at pijul.. https://pijul.org/. - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago

• Jujutsu: A Next Generation Replacement for Git

  How does this compare to Pijul[1]? [1] https://pijul.org/. - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• Local First, Forever

  Using theory of patches would better compliment the current approach. Integrating a scm such as https://pijul.org or atleast the underlying tech would allow for better conflict resolutions. Transferring patches should also allow for more efficient use of io. - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

  IMO Open Source software communities are where folks like you can really thrive. They're much closer at something like a meritocracy than traditional workplaces. > I want to make the next-gen version control system While you certainly could invent one yourself, you could consider contributing to popular ones like git/mercurial. It'd help teach you both the positive and the negative aspects of their design... - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• Version Control Beyond Git

  The feature I think I would most like to see is support for patches as a more first-class object. For example reverts and cherry picks have no real metadata. This leads to conflicts when merging branches that have cherry picks (although they often auto-resolve if they are exactly the same diff) and makes asking "Does $branch contain $patch" basically impossible to answer. https://pijul.org/ greatly improves this... - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• Pijul is a free and open source (GPL2) distributed version control system

  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 / over 2 years ago

• Josh: Just One Single History

  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 / over 2 years ago

• Introduction to Loro's Rich Text CRDT

  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 / over 2 years ago

• Introduction to Loro's Rich Text CRDT

  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 / over 2 years ago

• Launch HN: Diversion (YC S22) – Cloud-Native Git Alternative

  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 / over 2 years ago

• Launch HN: Diversion (YC S22) – Cloud-Native Git Alternative

  ??? Might be https://pijul.org/ with its commutative awesomeness. - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

• Ask HN: Can we do better than Git for version control?

  Solved is a strong word. For most people, especially with git-forges geing so popular, yes. But if you are doing binaries, because you are an artist/do 3d modeling, you probably sill use svn. And I am still checking in on https://pijul.org/ from time to time. - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

• Ask HN: Can we do better than Git for version control?

  Not only merge conflicts I find that this causes trouble if you need to manage multiple branches. Generally you see patterns like 1. Create patch 2. Merge to main branch 3. Backport a cherry pick. But there is no machine-readable metadata that the commit is the same in both cases. In simple cases you can work around this by basing the patch off of the merge base but if there are conflicts that doesn't work well.... - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago