reply
I'm not immediately aware. There's a certain amount of git-ness embedded in it with it being a DAG, having commits, and being compatible with git remotes. And, since the industry still runs on git, most people will need to learn it somewhat, anyway.
replyHonestly, until JJ is 1.0, I wouldn't recommend it for beginners. There's significant changes happening to the interface still.
replyI've been using it in relatively the same way for a while now. The only meaningful changes were native support for `tug` and `absorb`, neither of which significantly changed my workflow.
replyeh, there have been a good amount of breaking changes. `-d`/`--destination` → `-o`/`--onto` (the former isn't yet deprecated though); deprecated `--allow-new` on push (or, forcibly making it the default for `--bookmark`); deprecated `jj bookmark track foo@bar` (and `jj bookmark track foo` having a really-weird system (I personally just call it broken, even though the behavior is intentional) of sometimes tracking the bookmark on all remotes; really I'd call jj's entire system of bookmark tracking/pulling/pushing quite incomplete outside of the trivial cases); various changed revset functions over time that break configs; and a really-annoying thing of `jj git fetch` sometimes abandoning ascendants of `@` leaving you in a confusing state (if not one with conflicts), with the solution being a future `jj git sync`.
replyIt's certainly very usable despite all that, and the changes are simple enough to adapt to, but it's a pretty new thing.