Add co-author to commits
Add addCoAuthor command for commits
- Implement the `addCoAuthor` command to add co-authors to commits.
- Utilize suggestions helpers to populate author names from the suggestions list.
- Added command to gui at `LocalCommitsController`.
This commit introduces the `addCoAuthor` command, which allows users to easily add co-authors to their commits. The co-author names are populated from the suggestions list, minimizing the chances of user input errors. The co-authors are added using the Co-authored-by metadata format recognized by GitHub and GitLab.
This should already have been done when adding the "View divergence from
upstream" command, but now we're going to add yet another item to the menu that
is unrelated to setting or unsetting the upstream.
This fixes two minor problems with the prompts:
1. When pressing shift-A in the local commits view, it would first prompt
whether to stage all files, and then it would prompt whether to amend the
commit at all. This doesn't make sense, it needs to be the other way round.
2. When pressing shift-A on the head commit in an interactive rebase, we would
ask whether they want to amend the last commit, like when pressing shift-A in
the files view. While this is technically correct, the fact that we're
amending the head commit in this case is just an implementation detail, and
from the user's point of view it's better to use the same prompt as we do for
any other commit.
To fix these, we remove the confirmation panel from AmendHelper.AmendHead() and
instead add it at the two call sites, so that we have more control over this.
This encapsulates the logic to make sure we have something to commit; which is
to
- auto-stage all files if no files are staged and the SkipNoStagedFilesWarning
config is on
- otherwise, prompt the user whether they want to stage all files
- error out if we don't have any files at all
Of these, the first one was only done when committing with the built-in commit
message panel; there's no reason why it shouldn't also be done when committing
with the editor, or when amending, and now it is.
It implemented this because it wants to do custom truncation of the ref name;
however, we can achieve the same thing by passing the truncated ref name to our
DynamicTitleBuilder, which was previously unused.
When editing a commit, the index of the current commit can change; for example,
when merge commits are involved, or when working with stacked branches where
"update-ref" commands may be added above the selected commit.
Reselect the current commit after pressing "e"; this requires doing the refresh
blocking on the main thread. (Another option that I considered was to use a
SYNC refresh, and then select the new line with an OnUIThread inside the Then
function. This also works, but results in a very visible lag.)
This is useful for when you begin to type the message in lazygit's commit panel,
and then realize that you'd rather use your editor's more powerful editing
capabilities. Pressing <c-o> will take you right there.
It determines the yellow/red status by getting the merge-base between the
current branch and its upstream; while we're rebasing, the current branch is
HEAD, so it tried to get the merge-base between HEAD and HEAD{u}, which doesn't
work. Fix this by passing the name of the checked-out branch separately.
This also fixes a bug where after the rebase each commit in the commits view had a tick against it because we hadn't
refreshed the view since the base commit was no longer marked
This was on oversight on my part: I assumed that the --work-tree arg was
always intended for use with linked worktrees which have a .git file
pointing back to the repo.
I'm honestly confused now: seems like there are three kinds of worktrees:
* the main worktree of a non-bare repo
* a linked worktree (with its own gitdir in the repo's worktrees/ dir)
* a random folder which you specify as a worktree with the --work-tree arg
I'm pretty sure the --work-tree arg is only intended to be used with this
third kind or workree
The proper fix is to actually have these two functions share code,
or for views to be able to manage their own heights based on their contents.
But I want to get this out for the sake of a Lazygit Anniversary release.
Now that we refresh upon focus, we can scrap this file watching code.
Stefan says few git UIs use file watching, and I understand why: the
reason this code was problematic in the first place is that watching
files is expensive and if you have too many open file handles that
can cause problems.
Importantly: this code that's being removed was _already_ dead.
I've been thinking about this for a while: I think it looks really cool if nuking your working tree
actually results in a nuke animation.
So I've added an opt-out config for it
