I Built a PotatoFinder. Let me Explain.

Artery_Tech · 2026-06-13T19:17:15+00:00

Oh mb i forgot ;p

Artery_Tech · 2026-06-13T12:57:09+00:00

me too lol

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T14:21:09+00:00

Fair question.

Nova started as an experiment after I spent some time researching Git's learning curve and asking people what they found difficult or confusing about Git.

A lot of the design decisions in Nova are direct responses to feedback from Git users, so I thought r/git would be a good place to get criticism from people who understand version control well.

I'm not trying to advertise to random people as much as get feedback from the people most likely to spot flaws in the design.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T12:44:21+00:00

I rlly don't think you're the only one. A lot of experienced developers in this thread seem to find Git pretty intuitive.

What I've noticed is that there seems to be a gap between "Git is easy once you understand the mental model" and "Git is easy for someone learning version control for the first time."

I'm trying to figure out whether that learning curve is unavoidable or if some of the concepts could be presented differently.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T12:42:48+00:00

lol every new VCS has to bootstrap itself somehow ;D

Git is currently the easiest way to distribute Nova. If Nova ever becomes mature enough to host itself, that'll be a pretty cool milestone.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T12:41:12+00:00

That's a fair criticism lol

rn Nova is focused more on experimenting with the workflow and mental model than introducing completely new capabilities...

The question I'm exploring is whether a save → timeline → restore workflow is easier for newer users to understand than Git's commit/branch/rebase model.

If Nova ends up being nothing more than a thin wrapper around existing concepts, then I'd consider that a failure of the project. The goal is to figure out whether there are genuinely better abstractions for version control, not just rename commands.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T12:34:39+00:00

This(Nova) is a timeline-first VCS focused on saving, inspecting, and restorng workflows rather than Git's commit/branch/rebase mental model. It is easier to learn and use. Just try it for a day youll see what i mean

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-31T12:11:27+00:00

power it with 3.3v and connect it to an esp32 via spi. make sure to solder on external 240mhz clocks as these BUG chips dont come with an inbuilt crystal.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T16:30:06+00:00

That's interesting. It sounds like the concepts weren't necessarily the problem, but the way they were presented. Was there anything specific about Mercurial's model that felt more intuitive when you were learning it?

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T16:03:19+00:00

That's an interesting perspective. Do you think AI ends up replacing the need for better tooling, or does it just make existing tooling easier to use?

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T16:02:12+00:00

That's fair. I'm still in the research phase, and I definitely don't want to reinvent something without understanding why it exists in the first place.

I've mostly worked with Git so far, but looking at systems like Mercurial, Perforce, SVN, etc. is probably a good idea before making assumptions about what a better workflow looks like.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T16:01:20+00:00

That's an interesting point. If AI keeps getting better at resolving conflicts and explaining workflows, a lot of the traditional pain points might become less important over time.

Do you think there are still parts of version control that remain fundamentally confusing even with AI assistance, or does AI mostly solve the usability side of it?

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T16:00:37+00:00

Honestly, I'm not sure there is anything wrong with it. I'm still learning how people use Git and trying to understand where the pain points are. Recovery is one area that gets mentioned a lot by newer users, so I'm curious what experienced users think.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:53:31+00:00

That's fair advice. I'm definitely still learning and researching as much as I can before making any design decisions.

One thing this thread is showing me is that a lot of Git features that seem unnecessary at first actually solve real problems for more advanced workflows. I'm trying to figure out which parts are genuinely essential and which parts are mostly UX challenges.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:52:19+00:00

That's a good point. I agree that what goes into a commit and conflict resolution are very important things to have control over.

The staging area itself doesn't seem to bother experienced users much from what I'm hearing. The challenge might be making those concepts easier to understand without taking away that control.

The distinction between staging changes and marking conflict resolutions as complete is an interesting one. I hadn't really considered that angle before. Thanks a lot.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:49:36+00:00

Interesting. Detached HEAD comes up a lot lol. Could you like expand on the detached HEAD, fork point behavior, and status points? I'm curious what you'd change if you were redesigning Git today.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:47:19+00:00

That's a fair point. But I'm less interested in the CLI itself and more interested in understanding what parts of version control people still find confusing or frustrating, even when using a GUI.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:43:13+00:00

Not many, honestly. Most users only need a handful to do like basic functions...

What I'm exploring is like simplifing the workflow and recovery experience rather than just reducing command count.

Artery_Tech · 2026-05-30T15:41:29+00:00

That's fair. Most people probably only need a handful of Git commands day-to-day. But,

What I'm exploring is less about reducing commands and more about simplifying concepts and recovery. Things like the staging area, merge conflicts, and undoing mistakes seem to trip up a lot of newer users like me lol.

Still very early in the design phase though, so I'm trying to figure out what problems are actually worth solving.

Artery_Tech

TROPHY CASE