It sounds like it's not conceptually different from a MR, the main difference is preserving the rationale for all the changes by bolting the "threads" (a log of agent interactions) on top. I can see how the discussion logs are quite useful if you have an agent that is there to parse them.
This stuff reminds me of people who are full into XP and pair programming, where you end up agreeing to pull in more or less any work done by two people together. Not the worst model in the world.<p>I am disappointed by the "agent chat"-centric design for the future. There is important value in highlighting what's important, and <i>jettisoning the unimportant</i>. Written artifacts are good when they're nice and cut down. And it's not really about the sequence of events (well, most of the time)<p>Instead of "agent chat", I feel like a written page (that could be interacted with through agents) is a much more interesting way of working through a problem. Capture the final idea, and minimize the fluff around it.<p>And if nobody is going to read it anyways, why have the chat in the first place?<p>And of course the glib comment that I can't help but make:<p>> Teammates can ask the same agent why you chose a Mutex instead of an RwLock.<p>you know in this hypothetical neither human involved has much of any idea what is going on. Skill atrophy is real, folks! Be careful.
I never liked it myself, but this looks like an extension of Zed's own systems of collaborative coding (remotely), which in turn is built on top of the ideas of Extreme Programming, and / or intensive pair or mob programming.<p>It's interesting enough and I'd like to try it sometime, but probably only for hackathons - my main line of work is more planning than actual coding.
Would have loved to have tried this, but it still bizarrely lacks Apple Intel support.
Certainly looks interesting and a new way of working which would take some time to get adjusted.
Look interesting, though admittedly I am mostly interested in the open-source release of DeltaDB.