We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

What GitButler Is (and Isn’t)

  • Many readers note the product is a UX layer on top of git, not a new VCS, despite “what comes after git” branding.
  • It uses git repos and GitHub; seen more as a nicer workflow/CLI/GUI (e.g., virtual branches, operations log) than a fundamental replacement.
  • Some features (operations log, multi-branch workflows) are compared to existing git capabilities like reflog and worktrees.

Alternatives and “Post‑Git” Options

  • Several point to existing contenders: Jujutsu (jj), Pijul, Sapling, etc., as more credible “after git” systems.
  • jj in particular gets strong praise: snapshot model, easy branching/switching, good fit for AI workflows, git‑compatible hosting via GitHub.
  • Others say they’re still happy with SVN or even CVS; some believe distributed VCS was never needed for most users.

AI/Agents and Version Control

  • One camp argues AI agents make traditional git workflows feel outdated; coordination of many parallel branches and agent plans is painful.
  • Another camp responds that LLMs already handle git very well (including merges and PRs), so adding another abstraction is unnecessary.
  • GitButler’s “virtual branches” are pitched as better for agents than git’s single‑checked‑out‑branch model; critics counter that worktrees already solve this.

Funding, VC, and Business Model

  • Strong skepticism about $17M for “better git,” especially given git’s origin story and community maintenance.
  • Many say the raise is primarily based on the GitHub cofounder’s track record (“pedigree”), not the product.
  • Concerns include: extracting value from a critical tool, lock‑in, eventual enshittification, and misallocation of capital versus more tangible problems.
  • Others defend it: dev tooling is big business, $17M is modest compared to AI bets, and competition in VCS/forges is healthy.

Git UX: Fine vs Broken

  • Split views: some insist “git is fine” or that standardization outweighs any better alternative; others describe git’s UX as mediocre, especially for rebases, merge conflicts, large binaries, and GitHub’s PR/diff UI.
  • There’s interest in richer models (patch‑based, environment‑aware, centralized with locking for binaries).

Security and Workflow Concerns

  • One user reports GitButler installing git hooks that block normal git commit, calling it “malicious.”
  • A project representative replies that the hook is necessary for their multi‑branch “megamerge” model and is removed on checkout; critics still dislike a tool hijacking core git behavior.