jiggunjer

And phone number verification too? So that's 3 hurdles to jump to just get opus.

Title says uri but post only about urls, a type of uri

In 2017. Wonder what it's like today.

Funny. When you input only milk and soy milk, it ignores the soy. If only soy, suddenly the butter needs to be vegan.

Thx oh and maybe don't call it sem. It's not really semantic, more like a big picture view vs the ground level git lines. How about "bye", short for bird's-eye?

Another potential use case: This may help jujutsu auto split a large revision into small orthogonal revs.

Sometimes agent makes a monolithic commit and it's a lot of work to manually split code you didn't write. After such an auto split I can manually squash related revs into feature/ticket level.

Literally what china is doing now

Standardization. Who writes llms.txt? Everyone writes their own? Will agents still behave the same?

Biggest design bug imo is the workers need to register for the workflows they support, but will happily pull tasks from unrelated workflows if they're on the same queue. No way to put failed tasks back into the queue again either.

Isn't split stack architectural, i.e. client heavy vs thin client. Not a hard TS feature?

I'd say cue is nicer, but the tooling available is even less mature.

"appreciation"

Me too! I got interested in category theory and how to express a logical model of "workflows" as a category. Then ai told me workflows are a monoid and not to bother.

I note the absence of a motivation.

Is there no upstream package repo like docker has.

That's objective metrics. Not an objective way to compare, which is the selection of metrics to include.

IME "real data work" doesn't involve notebooks.

Strange advice not to push the mega merge. It's what I call my release branch.

One thing I like is there's many ways to achieve the same result. E.g. author uses a fancy rebase to graft a new branch between trunk and merge point. I could do the same by: 1) rebase -s onto trunk, 2) merge new branch with mega merge, 3) squash old megamerge upwards into new merge. No cryptic revset needed.

Taking notebooks to a production environment isn't fun either. With ai there's no more excuse for using that coding crutch.

I think they're related. You can't have a custom kernel if you can't rebuild the device tree. You can't rebuild blobs.

I think the mental model is like C vs python. Git gives you a forensic trace back in time. jj gives you a story with chapters. Look under the hood you'll still see forensic map of state transitions, but this not what we want to navigate most of the time. Sometimes we need to rewrite an early chapter to make the latest chapter make more sense.

Actually food water and shelter are free to those who can't afford it in many developed countries.

This, and owning a bank account, filing taxes, paying bills are all moving to internet only.

Some coffee shops in china you can't even order or pay without their app.

Definitely not true about models knowing jj. I've had latest opus and gpt fail at revsets and fileset syntax, even hallucinating subcommands like jj move (maybe it existed before, interface is not stable). Luckily it's easy enough to not need them most of the time.

Because re-arranging pictures in a gallery using words is less efficient than dragging them around on a screen. CMS still wins for some stuff.

There's also a security aspect, e.g. interactive editing lets you input secrets you don't want an agent to have.

I think a raspberry pi setup would be the cheapest? Not as professional perhaps.

Really, I got stuck trying to commit all files except those containing the string abc. As for revsets it's not easy to grab a single branch?

Tldr yes they're the same agentic harness in different UIs. Web browser, android app, ide extension, cli tool. They all change the "how" but not the "what". You buy premium you get more prompts and models.

For my personal cms I'm using sveltia. But their oath page assumes the repo remote is also the IdP, this means my login button has a GitHub logo instead of Google logo. Now I had spare credits so I forked it. Next weekend I'm fixing their weird support for asset management in R2 buckets.

So your company is fine giving access to their entire GitHub to a third party, and being locked into GitHub too? If their SaaS could work with local only repo setups it would be a better UX...