Reinventing the Pull Request
by bkolobara on 3/27/2026, 9:04:29 AM
https://lubeno.dev/blog/reinventing-the-pull-request
Comments
by: petcat
> Once you have the power to do a bunch of small self-contained changes, you want PRs to consist of one or two commits. You want to build on previous changes without needing to wait for them to be reviewed. Lubeno helps you to do exactly this.<p>Why would I want to build on changes that haven't been reviewed and accepted? That's a good way to waste my time having to redo something because the foundation it was based on was flawed and got rejected later.<p>There's a reason git and most accepted development workflows are <i>linear</i>.
4/2/2026, 11:35:42 AM
by: epage
I appreciate you recognize there is still a reason for grouping commits into mergeable units (PRs). Some go too far and only want every commit to be independent.<p>I also appreciate the ordering. In my projects, we put an extra focus on tests by having having a commit that adds new tests to reproduce the bad behavior so when you diff the tests with the fix commit, you get a visual of how things changed.<p>I also find that the order can be PR specific. I wonder about allowing the contributor or reviewrs reorder on per-PR basis.<p>There are also times we have a lot of test or doc changes. I wonder about grouping items to jump between or collapsing to more easily navigate around than opening and browsing a file picker.
4/2/2026, 11:32:01 AM
by: tfrancisl
I work in between two teams that would prefer no code review except for by pair programming (militantly arguing that this is the only true trunk based development, those small PRs are something else) and a team that every individual wants to own the dev cycle end to end. So its either pushes to main youre forced to catch up on that you had no alerts or knowledge of, or +6000 -500 diff PRs with way too many features and no story to tell in the commits.<p>Maybe this tool would help, but nothing in this pitch convinces me.
4/2/2026, 12:30:07 PM
by: Vinnl
Jujutsu is interesting in that it appeals both to Git enthusiasts, and people who strongly dislike Git's UX. It's great to see it spurring more innovation in the ecosystem around it.<p>Though if it can just make stacked PRs widespread, I'd already be very happy.
4/2/2026, 11:59:57 AM
by: Shank
On my first load of this page, it took 4.85 seconds to get meaningful content and the whole page took 8.09s. The vast majority of the delay seems to be from assets like the PNG images and the fonts, which don't seem to be on a CDN. I am located in Tokyo, Japan, with a 1Gbps symmetric connection, so while I am regionally quite distant from the site, I assume, I still think there are ample CDNs available that would speed this up.
4/2/2026, 11:23:25 AM
by: vermilingua
The platform this is an ad for looks to be very bare-bones, but I’m still very glad to see a new entry in the code forge space focusing on stacked PRs since Graphite went all-in on clanker review. Extremely keen to see what will come out of ERSC [0]<p>[0] <a href="https://ersc.io/" rel="nofollow">https://ersc.io/</a>
4/2/2026, 12:19:18 PM
by: andsoitis
I wonder how may engineers contribute to their code base on a daily basis.
4/2/2026, 1:15:21 PM
by: siruwastaken
I apreciate the fact that they mention that sometimes a commit change needs a fix before it ever even was pull-request ready. I think it would be great to have the ability to easily reorder/modify commits while in active development, and then lock them into permanent history afterwards. Apparently (according to the article) Jujutsu can do that, but I've never had personal exoerience with that VCS.
4/2/2026, 11:45:45 AM
by: lapcat
This blog post is self-promotion, essentially an advertisement for a paid product, Lubeno, submitted by the developer of the product.
4/2/2026, 11:44:20 AM
by: IshKebab
It blows my mind that Github <i>still</i> doesn't support stacked PRs. Do they never do work that depends on an open PR? Like, as soon as they open a PR they're like "right, better stop doing anything until it's merged"?<p>The file priority thing is a great idea too. That would be even more useful for search. The number of times I'm searching for something on Github and it just shows me a gazillion tests.... Yeah you can look up their advanced search syntax and exclude them probably, but it's always a hassle.
4/2/2026, 12:42:26 PM
by: Hendrikto
This is just an ad.
4/2/2026, 11:50:44 AM
by: arafeq
[dead]
4/2/2026, 1:30:17 PM
by: sbszllr
Let's forget that this post is an ad. I feel like there is a use for LLMs that could help us do stacked PRs better.<p>Right now there are effectively three ways to do a PR:<p>- a bunch of small commits, some of them related to the feature, some fixes, some mixing both -> a PR with 'n' commits -> they don't really make sense as atomic commits, you have to review the entire PR to make the sense of it<p>- a squashed PR<p>- some uber principled reorganisation of commits that separates key implementation concerns into smaller commits (effectively stacked PRs but clean)<p>The last option would be desirable but it's unreasonable to expect anyone to do it by hand. So this is where <maybe> an LLM could parse my garbage intermediate commits, the final diff and generate a stack instead?
4/2/2026, 12:04:01 PM