nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqqmshcslmwan3erj3ulczepe8q8a8xdyfkndnk8fudgtg8ccwg6zqfcr0xq (nprofile…r0xq) The thing that is helping is basically that Jujutsu provides a local rebase workflow that is more reliable. One way to think about Jujutsu is that whereas Git has one unnamed staging area, Jujutsu has unlimited staging areas that can be stacked on each other in a DAG. Of course, these "staging areas" are just the mutable (i.e. non-pushed) commits in your working copy.
What makes this so nice is that I can reliably edit one of these changes and all the dependent changes get automatically rebased. This is theoretically possible in Git, and I'm fairly good at it, but for some reason in Git it always leads to lots of suffering and cascading failures. One important difference from Git, however, is that the even though the changes have a different commit ID, they keep a separate identity (the "change id") across all edits and rebases.
Anyway, when working on my forest, I sometimes have three or four changes going on at a time. Maybe I'm fixing a certain class of typo across the whole forest; maybe I'm rewriting a theorem; maybe I'm adding a new lecture. Anyway, all these can be done more or less independently, and when one depends on the other, I can safely edit the root without creating lots of unnecessary conflicts. When conflicts do arise, they are easy to resolve as a non-emergency-matter because merge conflicts themselves are a first class part of Jujutsu's change model. I can go work on something else and come back to fix the conflicts, etc.