20 comments

[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 37.4 ms ] thread
I find it interesting that the video itself is unlisted.

So do they want people to watch this or not?

Thanks for this!
Shame that Google can't afford anything more than a potato microphone...
FYI: Linux only GA planned for early 2026
This talk is focused on JJ within Google.

This is a Google-internal only GA. JJ is available externally just fine. Google is mainly a linux-dev shop, with all other platforms being second-class citizens.

What does "GA" stand for? General availability?
(comment deleted)
>Jujutsu, aka JJ, is an open-source, Git-compatible VCS
Oh so Google is finally releasing their VCS system I hear so much about. Well it’s Jj not Piper but it looks like Jj will eventually replace Piper and if half the things I’ve heard about Piper are true it will be very successful.
Not really on topic, but I think it's funny that most MMA style gyms always offer Jiu Jitsu and Muay Thai as two classes, right after each other. Of the two, Jiu Jitsu seems to generally be the more popular one.
I've worked in huge repos with hundreds of developers pushing code every day, dozens of MRs open per day, and all I always needed was a very limited set of what git is capable of (git commit, git co, git st, git merge/rebase, git log).

To find bugs, I use "bisect but visually" (I usually use jetbrains IDEs, so I just go to the git history, and do binary search in the commits, displaying all the files that were affected, and jumping easily to such versions).

Git conflicts are easily solvable as well with a gui (jetbrain IDEs) via the cli or via something like Sourcetree. Easily, the most used "feature" of git that i use is:

- for a given line of code, see all the files that were touched when that line was introduced

But I usually do that via the IDE (because to go through dozens of files via cli is a bit of a hassle for me)

So, what am I missing? I know jujutsu is much simple (and powerful) than git, but I only have used the "good parts" of git and it has never been a bottleneck... but ofc, you don't know what you don't know.

(comment deleted)
I'm trying to understand, would jj's first class conflicts solve the issue of having "stacks" of PRs that can easily be updated at any point in the stack? This is one of the features most absent from git, but prevalent in Google's tooling as well as Meta's. The only good known solution I know is graphite.dev
jj is so good, finally a tool to replace Git.

SVN -> Git -> jj

jj has been fantastic for my productivity, but most of that comes from its alignment with the particular SWE practices on my team: trunk-based development, small atomic commits, quick review turnaround.

Getting rid of the staging area and allowing conflicts are the biggest wins for me day-to-day. No more stashing/popping or littering my workspace with WIP commits. It's so easy to whip up a change, send it for review, then ping-pong between writing new code on top of the change and making reviewer-requested edits further down the stack.

I cannot wait for these big techs to ditch their Mercurial-based solutions, which are frustratingly slow and have surprisingly bad UX. Just get rid of Python completely. The more ampersands in the code for my VCS system, the better it runs.