Pijul lets you describe your edits after you’ve made them, instead of beforehand.
On a big product, forensics matter. Not day to day, but often enough and if your metadata is rotten then you’re left with the oral history of the project as your only guide. And even that may not exist, depending on project structure.
When selecting technology I look for “a rising tide lifts all boats” situations and opt-in tools have limitations in that regard.
There’s a big gap between ‘can do’ and ‘will do’ and I feel like we downplay that frequently in our industry, and to our own peril.
In that section's context, it sounds like naming a branch after having already started on it. In which case, that seems to me the tiniest bit less useful than git's ability to rename branches (git branch -m oldname newname).
What am I missing?