Re:jj: a Git-compatible VCS that is both simple and powerful
by steveklabnik on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @06:14PM
(#43030814)
Given Jj has pluggbale backends, with two production ready ones and one test one, even if they did want to give it up, that would mean moving it to a third party, so like, yeah, not going away.
Re:jj: a Git-compatible VCS that is both simple and powerful
by pbh101 on Thursday February 13, 2025 @09:49AM
(#43036373)
Agree with current state but I mean who knows how ecosystem might evolve… one vendor might ascend and embrace extend and extinguish on a separate backend. I think it unlikely, but it’s a possible path.
For so many reasons, SVN to Git was a no-brainer but still constituted significant migration costs for existing teams and codebases: training, retooling, high-fidelity data transfer (you retained the commit history, right?).
For a tool with such wide adoption, motivating an ecosystem to move where there are many actors with different incentive structures, some of them will look and say ‘30% better isn’t even close to sufficient to spend time and $$$ on this. I would need ~10x better and/or a gain of altogether new capabilities impossible in previous tool to motivate that.’
It’s great that jj can be used independently without needing the whole ecosystem to move today, but once/if that part changes I’d expect it to be a long slog towards re-standardization if ever.
But jj likely already fully anticipated this given its compatibility with the Git wire protocol in the first place and I doubt it would ever give that up given the current landscape.