| > The benefits touted are very abstract Not really? From someone's post here a year ago: > The real innovation of a lot of these alternative DVCS systems is that they free the state of the source from being dependent on the history that got you there. Such that applying patches A & B in that order is the same as applying B' & A' -- it results in the same tree. Git, on the other hand, hashes the actual list of changes to the state identifier, which is why rebasing results in a different git hash id. Anybody who's wrestled with reordering/rebasing git history or has done git archaology is able to understand this benefit. From Pijul's site: > Pijul is the first distributed version control system to be based on a sound mathematical theory of changes After years of grudgingly tolerating using a deployed prototype for a VCS, yes, I want the mathematically sound alternative. All that being said, I do wish you the best, because truly, I am tired of git and JJ does seems like an improvement. |
Most of my wrestling is with merge conflicts and a consistent tree doesn't help with that.