I've done both the rebase and the merge flows in different jobs.

I just don't see the fuss about rebase. Merging just works fine.

Edit: OK, I realized later that I'm not really responding to the usual git rebase -i use case.

Have you heard people say that because of magit they started using more "advanced" git workflows, and how they emphasize having a better UI makes a difference?

It's the same idea with jujutsu. I'm much more likely to use git's power via jujutsu than directly with git. It's because jujutsu lets you do it all with a much simpler interface - fewer commands, and fewer concepts. And knowing that "jj undo" has your back.

As a sibling commenter said: Likely 99% of git users don't do "git rebase -i". But the percentage who do similar with jujutsu is high - perhaps over half[1] of jujutsu users do the equivalent of "git rebase -i" all the time. Many of them didn't when they used git.

The interface matters.

[1] If you told me 80%, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Yes. almost the majority of git users do this. i would say that as an expert commenter, 99.9% of people outside of California do this.

I don't rebase. I just merge and resolve the conflicts. Nowadays, I just have an agent do that for me, and move on with my life.