git is both a (bad) UI and a protocol. Jujutsu is a UI on top of git (the protocol).

There's nothing wrong with taking the time to learn how to use a bad UI, especially if there's no other option. But don't mistake your personal mastery of git for evidence that it's better than jj.

In all likelihood, the git proposal you allude to would not extend further than adding a bit of persistent metadata that follows commits after "destructive" changes. And even then, it'd be imperatively backing into the change-as-commit-graph data model rather than coming by it honestly.

> If you actually take time to learn your tools and how they're intended to be used, there's really not reason to learn jj IMO

This is like saying if people take the time to learn curl, there's really no reason to learn Firefox.

And it doesn't suggest to me that you're all that familiar with jj!

- automatic rebasing! goodbye to N+1 rebases forever

- first-class conflict resolution that doesn't force you to stop the world and fix

- the revset/template languages: incredibly expressive; nothing like it in git

- undo literally any jj action; restore the repo to any previous state. try that with the reflog...

No amount of learning git nets you any of these things.