> why not just use jj

1. It's very new; I haven't had time to learn it properly yet.

2. It's very new and tooling doesn't support it well, e.g. VSCode. There aren't many GUIs yet.

3. I tried it once co-locating with Git and you definitely can't use both at the same time, even if it can use a `.git` directory. It ended up in a huge mess.

I'm definitely in favour of better-than-Git alternatives but I don't think it's reasonable to expect everyone to switch to JJ right now. It isn't so much better that abandoning the de facto standard is obviously worth it yet. (In contrast to things like the iPhone, Rust, SSDs, etc.).

Also I really wish they would focus on some of the bigger pain points of Git. I can deal with rebasing and whatnot. Sometimes it's painful but it's usually not that bad.

What I can't deal with are submodules and LFS. Both are awful and fixing them properly requires fundamental changes to the VCS which aren't going to happen in Git. JJ has an opportunity to do that. Imagine if JJ could say "we have submodules but they aren't awful!" or "you can check in large files!". Those are the sort of huge advantages that would mean you can say "why not just use JJ".