zlacker

>>latchk+(OP)
There are a ton of interesting ideas in the README - things like the way it uses the birthday paradox to decide when to increase the length of the hash IDs.

This tool works by storing JSONL in a .beads/ folder. I wonder if it could work using a separate initially-empty "beads" branch for this data instead? That way the beads data (with its noisy commit history) could travel with the repository without adding a ton of noise to the main branch history.

The downside of that is that you wouldn't be able to branch the .beads/ data or keep it synchronized with main on a per-commit basis. I haven't figured out if that would break the system.

>>simonw+dx
The way I read it is beads steers agents to make use of the .beads/ folder to stay in sync across machines. So, my understanding is a dedicated branch for beads data will break the system.

>>wowami+6y
But wouldn't that dedicated branch, pushed to origin, also work for staying synced across multiple machines?

>>simonw+8z
Depends what you mean by “synced”—do you want your beads state to be coupled with commits (eg: checking out an old commit also shows you the beads state at that snapshot)? Using a separate branch would decouple this. I think the coupling is a nice feature, but it isn’t a feature that other bug trackers have, so using a separate branch would make beads more like other bugtrackers. If you see the coupling as noise, though, then it sounds like that is what you want.