Hi, On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 03:51:51PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote: > * Guido Günther ([email protected]) wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 03:07:34PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote: > > > Source: git-buildpackage > > > Version: 0.9.38 > > > Severity: wishlist > > > Tags: upstream > > > > > > Jujutsu (https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj) is a git compatible VCS that has > > > many nice features for local editing. It would be interesting if gbp > > > could support jj alongside git for all it's operations. > > > > > > A bit premature because jj isn't packaged in Debian yet, but just > > > wanted to get this idea down and see if there's any enthusiasm for it. > > > > I don't understand what you're suggesting here? Using `jj` instead of > > git to perform the actual operations? As far as I read it currently > > jj uses git as storage so I wouldn't know what difference that would > > make in practice so I assume you're suggesting something else? > > Generally yes, use jj instead of git for many/most of the > commands. Per > https://jj-vcs.github.io/jj/latest/git-compatibility/#co-located-jujutsugit-repos > in a colocated repo some mixing of commands is possible but things > might be confused when mixing mutating commands. Some obvious nice > things to support with jj: > > * gbp clone: so you get jj client initialized > * gbp dch: Being able submit the changelog natively > * gbp pq: This feels like the killer feature, since managing commit > chains in jj is much more pleasant. > * gbp pull: May need to invoke jj to keep things consistent
I see, so someone interested in doing this would have to implement the `GitRepository` class with jj commands (and likely some other places that invoke git directly. -- Guido
