Zed should focus on basics. When it focuses on basics Zed is good.
<a href="https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/54150" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/54150 failing to show newly created files and declining to provide a refresh button, instead adding a polling backend, breaks Zed on WSL.
Why a new version control system? Why not git, jj, or another existing system?
I agree with you that I wish they'd just nail the editor. I've been using it for years now and I really like it, but there are a few rough parts (settings and LSPs especially) that could probably be tuned up in no time if the focus was there.
Having said that, I love the idea of correlating the agent sessions to the changes. I'm glad someone is working on it.
You don't need a tool for that just configure your agent to write commit messages that link to a LLM log. And changes between commits. Maybe don't care why do we even care?
Of course you are right. I could write my own software to do what I want. Or, I could just do it all myself manually. This argument is valid in pretty much all cases, so I concede the point.
NoDodgeQuestion · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/54150" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/54150 failing to show newly created files and declining to provide a refresh button, instead adding a polling backend, breaks Zed on WSL.
Why a new version control system? Why not git, jj, or another existing system?
ibejoeb · · focus · HN ↗
Having said that, I love the idea of correlating the agent sessions to the changes. I'm glad someone is working on it.
hahahaa · · focus · HN ↗
ibejoeb · · focus · HN ↗
hahahaa · · focus · HN ↗
I think Zed doesn't need to build this though.
cannonpalms · · focus · HN ↗