I think this is very interesting. I'm skeptical about it because my approach to collaboration is so much wrapped up in the idea of _write code alone, review together_ but, as we've learned elsewhere in the industry, tighter loops (through continuous integration) have many benefits. Specifically, this approach seems much more conducive to enabling developers to create atomic commits... which I'm a big fan of.
That said, I'm curious about 2 things. First, git.live are tackling the same problem but _on top of_ git: do you think that there's going to be a bigger challenge for you because you're changing process _and_ technology, or do you think the fact that it's built from the ground up will make it easier (especially given how painful git can be)? I could see my own team being open to something like git.live (new process), but very skeptical about Sturdy (new technology). I'm curious how you intend to tackle that skepticism from developers.
Secondly, the homepage doesn't mention the fact that you _can_ integrate back into GitHub to support existing CI/CD integrations. That is something very important to me, and I didn't realise it was possible until looking at the help docs for GitHub migration[1]. Can you talk more about your vision for Continuous Integration with Sturdy? I've just noticed that it's mentioned as coming soon in the "Solutions" drop-down.
I'm going to give Sturdy a shot (using the GitHub integration to benefit from existing CI/CD) but a long term switch would be heavily dependent upon your vision for CI/CD! I come from a world where 10+ min test runs are acceptable, and so the slow turnaround of the Pull Request model (from write code to review) is necessary -- I'd love to hear how you think this can be done in (near) realtime.
Building on top of existing technologies makes adoption easier in the short run, but would heavily restrict our options for what's possible in the long run, and we're trying to balance short term gains with the long term vision. Building on top of Git means that you have to drag all of Git's legacy with you, with all of its warts and pitfalls. Git is the only tool that I've seen developers regularly have to Google/ask "how to X", compared to tools like your IDE where the workflow is much more discoverable, and self-explanatory.
As you saw, we are compatible with Git, and even support using both Sturdy and GitHub at the same time. Which we're hoping moves us close to only providing a new process for the sceptics, while you incrementally can use more and more of the new technology.
Developers are right to be sceptic, we're tackling this by staying open, both with the development process behind the scenes, and making Sturdy easy to test out and migrate to and away from.
Great that you spotted the GitHub integration, we should really highlight it more! For CI/CD, except for supporting it natively, we're also exploring automatically executing tests and linters at set intervals, or when new changes are detected. So that the test results are as up-to-date as possible, and that every time you come back from a meeting or a short break, that you would have new results available.
That said, I'm curious about 2 things. First, git.live are tackling the same problem but _on top of_ git: do you think that there's going to be a bigger challenge for you because you're changing process _and_ technology, or do you think the fact that it's built from the ground up will make it easier (especially given how painful git can be)? I could see my own team being open to something like git.live (new process), but very skeptical about Sturdy (new technology). I'm curious how you intend to tackle that skepticism from developers.
Secondly, the homepage doesn't mention the fact that you _can_ integrate back into GitHub to support existing CI/CD integrations. That is something very important to me, and I didn't realise it was possible until looking at the help docs for GitHub migration[1]. Can you talk more about your vision for Continuous Integration with Sturdy? I've just noticed that it's mentioned as coming soon in the "Solutions" drop-down.
I'm going to give Sturdy a shot (using the GitHub integration to benefit from existing CI/CD) but a long term switch would be heavily dependent upon your vision for CI/CD! I come from a world where 10+ min test runs are acceptable, and so the slow turnaround of the Pull Request model (from write code to review) is necessary -- I'd love to hear how you think this can be done in (near) realtime.
Thanks,
[1] https://getsturdy.com/features/migrate-from-github