> For that is it not better to have separate sessions for planning stuff and doing actual work?
replyPersonally, seems like too much effort for something that would still need to (and fail to) have some sort of a link between the two, so I could go from the planning over to implementation and back easily. In reality, that'd get lost in the noise of dozens of sessions - I mostly just want the harness to help me do work and otherwise get out of my way, not make me dance around it. Ergo, the more context management it handles, the better!
Eh, I find managing sessions in Pi extremely easy. In fact, I customized how it mages session as part of my workflow, and how agents in different sessions communicate with one another.
replyIt's part of why I really dislike to work in Claude Code, and found it too unwieldy. There I have to keep dancing around it to manage the context in a sensible way.
What’s the difference between sub agents and separate sessions?
replyI'd assume separate sessions are not aware of each other, sub-agents are spawned by an orchestrator agent?
replyAlmost correct, separate sessions can communicate with one another. In my case, planning and coding communicate by writing files locally.
replyAnd subagents don't always communicate with each other, AFAIK that is the most common case.
replyseparate session need more hand holding, i guess?
replyEr, no?
replyI mean, not in Pi at least. In Claude Code it is a chore.