I don't understand what the point is over just using git. The top intro defined some JJ names for git things, but it's not clear why I would want or need this. What problem does it solve with using git?
I recently started trying it out at work and I like how fluent it makes what would be more advanced git operations like squashing and rebasing.
Issues I've run into have been understanding its version of branches (bookmarks), understanding its merge conflict indicators, and its lack of respect for git skip-worktree.
My git use is mostly a direct translation of mercurial (which I learned first), and the staging area is really optional. The only time I ever type `git add` is when adding a new file; otherwise I just
vi foo.txt
git commit foo.txt
I guess jj is different still (by way of ~autocommitting), but my point stands.
This is the thing I don't like about jj. I know it makes splitting easy, but splitting is harder than selectively adding after blindly merging all changes.
in my case, i abandoned advanced git-ing because it's too much pain for little gain and i typically forgot everything by the time i'd actually need it. nowadays i only use the basics commands with the occasional cp -r.
with jj i get the gain with little pain.
When it opened up the entire left-half of my screen is blank, and the diagrams are obviously cut off on the right. There is no apparent way to scroll horizontally (excepting a mouse with a horizontal scroll mechanism of some sort): There is no horizontal scroll bar and neither the arrow-keys nor click-and-drag serve to scroll horizontally. Zooming out made things a bit clear what was going on, (margin notes shifted the content far to the right).
Firefox, 1920x1200 screen.