I agree. Mutable commits are making a comeback recently and I love it. A hill I'll also die on is that branches shouldn't exist lol. Disclaimer - I'm the founder - but if you want a review tool that caters to jj users you might like revset.dev. It shows you the jj commits that make up a PR, and you can see the various revisions the jj commits and PR have gone through
It does. This is definitely something that's being actively iterated on though. Let's say as a reviewer you leave some comments on Revision 3, then the user pushes 2 more PR revisions and asks you to re-review. The default diff when you open the PR again will be from Revision 3 -> Current code. It lets reviewers easily see what's changed since their last review.
There are also the "Mark as reviewed" checkboxes per file that can help you track what's been looked at.
Comments
I agree. Mutable commits are making a comeback recently and I love it. A hill I'll also die on is that branches shouldn't exist lol. Disclaimer - I'm the founder - but if you want a review tool that caters to jj users you might like revset.dev. It shows you the jj commits that make up a PR, and you can see the various revisions the jj commits and PR have gone through
Does it let you manually keep track of the parts you've actually seen? Instead of using the granularity provided by the PR author?
It does. This is definitely something that's being actively iterated on though. Let's say as a reviewer you leave some comments on Revision 3, then the user pushes 2 more PR revisions and asks you to re-review. The default diff when you open the PR again will be from Revision 3 -> Current code. It lets reviewers easily see what's changed since their last review.
There are also the "Mark as reviewed" checkboxes per file that can help you track what's been looked at.