@mikepaler.eth

User report, 24 hours into using Beads https://github.com/steveyegge/beads at the suggestion of @noun839.eth (what happened to your profile?): 1. Very easy, smooth installation. Up and running in < 1/2 hour on CC. 2. Sooo much promise for true parallel, agentic code dev infrastructure. Very excited to push it... 3. Me > CC: "do you find git + the beads database to be an efficient cross session "memory" of sorts?" CC > Me: "Together they give me code-level + task-level memory without extra tooling. I can run bd list --status=in_progress and git log --oneline -10 and orient reasonably fast. The gaps: 1. Conversational reasoning doesn't persist - The back-and-forth where we debated approaches, hit dead ends, or made tradeoffs vanishes. Only the outcome survives in code/commits. 2. Requires discipline - Beads notes/design fields are powerful but only if populated. Most issues I see have minimal context beyond the title. 3. No automatic capture - If you don't explicitly write "we chose X over Y because Z" somewhere, it's lost. What would close the gap: A hook that prompted me to summarize key decisions into the active beads issue before session end - essentially journaling into bd update <id> --notes="...". That would give future sessions the why alongside the what. Right now git + beads is ~70% of ideal cross-session memory. The missing 30% is captured reasoning."

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction