I wasn't asking. I loved git.

But then after trying jj, I wrote this tutorial because I love it even more.

Yes they are. I am. Many other people are too.

git was a great step forwards, but its conceptual model just doesn't map well to a lot of workflows, and some very simple things are very difficult or impossible with it. It was designed using a certain set of assumptions and primitives, and other assumptions and primitives turn out to be much more suitable for certain workflows.

I don't know if jj is the perfect answer, but it's a huge step forwards in many ways.

The feeling I get with jj is it is almost like people are trying to convince others why jj is superior instead of just sharing that jj exists and let others decide themselves. It seems like every few months there is a jj post on HN which devolves into the narratives of “git works for me” and “but jj is better at X”.

Exactly the same thing happened when git showed up (alongside the same things for bzr, darcs, hg, etc. too!)

Where X = something I’ve never wanted to do

I definitely am. Haven't touched git in over a year. If there was just a single feature to point at where jj meaningfully improves on git, I think it's: `jj undo`.

It is a universal undo command. It works for every change in your repository. You don't need to memorize/google/ask claude how to revert each individual kind of operation (commit, rebase, delete branch, etc.). You try a jj command, look at your repo, and if you don't like what you see, you `jj undo`.

The biggest downside for me is that no longer have the necessary expertise to help coworkers who get themselves into trouble with git.

You could have said the same thing about subversion.

Subversion is a fine VCS. But git offers a better approach with being offline-first and decentralized. It also makes merging branches a lot easier.

I don't know enough about jj to praise it, but I don't think git will be the last VCS that will become widely popular.

jj has almost 30,000 stars on github. You might not be looking for a different git ux, but plenty of people are!

I'm asking for a github replacement, alas it might come from github itself with stacked PRs.

git is good, but jj is good, too. nobody asked for a better CVS either, until someone did.

are you conflating github and git? I'm just confused as to how jj is a replacement to github

I'm not, github sucks, git is ok. Stacked PRs are what jj makes easy but is completely broken in github and as of today they're releasing a 'stacked prs' product which only makes jj better value when working with github vs git.

Agreed and not only that but for any comment on this page which raises a valid exception; there is a cadre of jj devotees ready to counter them if and where they think they can. It feels like someone had a some financial state in brainwashing the world to leave git for jj.