FughettaHow it compares
Fughetta next to the obvious alternatives
Three other ways to give a coding agent somewhere to work. Each is a reasonable choice; they differ in what survives when the agent, the machine or the network does not.
| Way | Where the files are | Isolation | After a lost reply | Trade-offs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FughettaThis | Hosted or self-hosted | A worldline per agent | Receipts by operation ID | The source is the product; the gateway never runs your code. |
| A Git host plus an agent | A code host, then the agent's machine | Branches and worktrees | Whatever the agent reports | A good fit when the commit is the unit of work and a human reviews it. |
| A local MCP file server | The agent's machine | None by default | None by default | Nothing to deploy, and nothing between the agent and the directory it was given. |
| Fughetta, self-hostedSame product | Your own network | A worldline per agent | Receipts by operation ID | The same gateway, source and worker, with your configuration and your backups. |
If a human reviews every change before it is merged, a Git host and an agent on a laptop are enough, and Fughetta is an extra hop. The hop earns its place when several agents work at once, when the machine that runs them is not the machine that keeps the source, or when a lost reply has to be read back, not guessed at.