jj-vcs/jj v0.47.0
Comments on “jj-vcs/jj v0.47.0”
3 judges. Scored by all three judges. Only the day’s top stories get the claim check. How far stories are checked
The jj version control project released v0.47.0, a Git-compatible system. Its headline changes include a new revset template function, a built-in multi-way :editor merge tool, and binary detection in jj file search.
Why it ranked
No. 134 of 139 with a score of 0.55. The panel rated it highest on new information (0.91) and substantiated (0.75), lowest on audience breadth (0.42). The judges disagreed most on substantiated (spread 0.43), so the story is marked contested. Placed No. 134, No. 135 by score alone: the 28th Programming & dev tools story of the day (−0.080). The placement terms move stories; they are not part of the score.
- AI judgeJudge 2claude-haiku-5-5
- Release notes for a established open-source VCS with many concrete, practically relevant changes and breaking changes; detailed but a release changelog, not deep technical explanation, with modest broader significance.
- AI judgeJudge 3gpt-5.6-luna
- A substantive jj version release with workflow changes, breaking changes, new templating and conflict features, and numerous bug fixes. It is highly useful to jj users and Git-oriented developers, but its impact is concentrated in a niche.
Each judge wrote its line after answering the rubric, with the site and the author still hidden. Every answer behind this is in the table under Score.
Score
0.55total under rubric v2.3Contestedjudges differ by 0.43 on substantiated
- Significance0.43
- Reader interest0.55
- Audience breadth0.42
- Practical relevance0.69
- Substantiated0.75
- Technical depth0.66
- New information0.91
- Counts against: Promotional0.05
- Counts against: Overclaim0.08
Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).
| Question | Judge 1 | Judge 2 | Judge 3 | Mean | Spread | Weight | Contribution (weight times mean) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SignificanceHow much does this change what people in tech know or can do? | 0.49 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.14 | +0.24 | +0.103 |
| Reader interestWould a well-informed senior engineer or tech founder want to read this today, and likely pass it on? | 0.43 | 0.55 | 0.68 | 0.55 | 0.25 | +0.26 | +0.144 |
| Audience breadthHow many people who build technology does it concern? | 0.39 | 0.50 | 0.38 | 0.42 | 0.12 | +0.13 | +0.055 |
| Practical relevanceHow useful is it to someone who builds software or tech products? | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.04 | +0.22 | +0.152 |
| SubstantiatedHow well is it backed? Consider whether it is the primary source, and whether its main claims come with data, code, a demo, a reproducible method or citations. | 0.73 | 0.55 | 0.98 | 0.75 | 0.43 , above the contested threshold | +0.05 | +0.038 |
| Technical depthHow technically substantive is it? | 0.81 | 0.60 | 0.57 | 0.66 | 0.24 | +0.05 | +0.033 |
| New informationDoes it contain information absent from the stories covered in the last 7 days (list provided)? | 0.87 | 0.90 | 0.97 | 0.91 | 0.10 | +0.05 | +0.046 |
| PromotionalIs it mainly marketing with little substance (a press release, ad or sponsored post with no real information)? A launch post that carries real news is not promotional. | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.03 | −0.19 | −0.009 |
| OverclaimDo the headline or conclusions claim more than the body supports? | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.11 | −0.11 | −0.009 |
| Sum of contributions | +0.553 | ||||||
| Claim-check penalty | 0.000 | ||||||
| Total, as published | 0.553 | ||||||
Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.
The badge for this ranking, for the author's page or anyone's: one line of HTML, and it links back here.
<a href="https://rubric.hrih.si/editions/2026-11-05/134/"><img src="https://rubric.hrih.si/badge/2026-11-05/134.svg" alt="Ranked #134 on Rubric, 5 Nov 2026" width="245" height="28"></a>Also covered by
No other coverage was clustered with this story.
Elsewhere
Elsewhere: HN —
Recorded for context only, checked 5 Nov 2026, 05:46 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.