Redesigning source control at Anthropic

Yea, I'm pretty much hiting the same limits. I'm still using git for the time being, mainly because I package everything as daily commits with an external orchestrator managing tasks/issues. Lately my code velocity is at ~1 million LOC added per week, spread throughout my various repos (I don't use the monorepo approach). Problem is I'm looking at 100x this velocity over the next few months when I get a new code generator up and running, so I'll definitely have to drop git.

Another issue that I believe Anthropic here didn't state is that git performance _severely_ get degraded when you have hundred of commits landing in parallel. Hence why I fell back to the daily commit approach. You get less granularity but you get stability.

Honey, it's time for your daily Anthropic PR piece!

This is such a Claude written post. Obvious tells everywhere, but the most annoying is how it uses private terms without defining them. What the fuck is "Spanner"? It refers to it multiple times. Of course we know the reason is that some dickhead at Ant told their Claude to write a blog post, and Claude being Claude has very poor/non-existent theory-of-mind for people and generates this trash.

All the other tech billionaire are jealous: they all want their own recursively-self-improving megacorporation.

come on HN debate the merits of the design not the flaw that Anthropic has infinity tokens and "why even do source control at that point?"

    We’re completely rethinking our priors. This project prompted us to take a very hard look at other workflows designed for human scale. A proper merge queue, for example, doesn’t make much sense at agent scale. What does CI even mean when hundreds or even thousands of changes can merge while tests are running? We haven’t been able to effectively replicate the industry standard of a global repository lock on the merge queue, so instead, we’ve invested in post-merge and pre-deploy automated testing. This does mean that concurrent changes can conflict, but Claude can typically fix these conflicts faster than humans can even identify them.

1. I've seen ai-written code. Ugh...

2. So they're trying to make code so complex that humans can't read it anymore?!

3. What's the point of changing code? Are the changes - how do you say - useful?

4. Thank God for Git, the amazing piece of software by the venerable Linus Towalds, that just keeps on giving! It's free, open, and excellent quality source-control software, and you can even keep binary files there. Excellent stuff. I can't imagine ever not using it.

[dead]

[dead]

[dead]

[dead]

[flagged]

[dead]

tl;dr why is it better than git?

[flagged]

> Git offers tools for working with a slice of a repository, such as shallow clones, sparse checkouts, and promisor remotes.

I honestly just cannot. Just tell me what the workflow is. Give me a video that is Twilio-level simple explanation.

Back to SVN then? Noted.

Oh wow. There is nothing I'd rather use less than version control vibe coded by Anthropic.