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.
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 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
If the command used by OSCommand.OpenLink fails, lazygit crashes. With this change, if the OpenLink command fails, lazygit just shows a dialog inviting the user to visit the relevant URL.
Fixes#2882
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
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
This allows to do the equivalent of "git rebase --onto <target> <base>", by
first marking the <base> commit with the new command, and then selecting the
target branch and invoking the usual rebase command there.
It's tricky to get this right for reflog commits wrt what's the current branch
for each one; so just disable it entirely here, it's probably not something
anybody needs here.
We want to mark all local branch heads with a "*" in the local commits panel, to
make it easier to see how branches are stacked onto each other. In order to not
confuse users with "*" markers that they don't understand, do this only for the
case where users actually use stacked branches; those users are likely not going
to be confused by the display. This means we want to filter out a few branch
heads that shouldn't get the marker: the current branch, any main branch, and
any old branch that has been merged to master already.
- check out a non-main branch before we start
- add authors to expected commits so that we can see whether the commits show an
asterisk
- explicitly check what the top line displays after bisecting has started
This shows that the detached head shows an asterisk, which we don't want. We'll
fix that in the next commit.
This test not only tests the correct handling and display of the updateRef
command, but also the visualization of branch heads in the commits panel. Since
we are about to change the behavior here, extend the test so that a master
commit is added (we don't want this to be visualized as a branch head), and then
a stack of two non-main branches. At the end of this branch we only want to
visualize the head commit of the first.
We've been sometimes using lo and sometimes using my slices package, and we need to pick one
for consistency. Lo is more extensive and better maintained so we're going with that.
My slices package was a superset of go's own slices package so in some places I've just used
the official one (the methods were just wrappers anyway).
I've also moved the remaining methods into the utils package.
In the presentation layer, when showing branches, we'll show worktrees against branches if they're
associated. But there was a race condition: if the worktree model was refreshed after the branches model,
it wouldn't be used in the presentation layer when it came time to render the branches.
A better solution would be to have some way of signalling that a particular context needs to be refreshed
and after all the models are done being refreshed, we then refresh the contexts. This will prevent
double-renders
When switching worktrees (which we can now do via the branch view) we re-layout the windows and their views.
We had the worktree view ahead of the file view based on the Flatten() method in context.go, because it used
to be associated with the branches panel.
There are quite a few paths you might want to get e.g. the repo's path, the worktree's path,
the repo's git dir path, the worktree's git dir path. I want these all obtained once and
then used when needed rather than having to have IO whenever we need them. This is not so
much about reducing time spent on IO as it is about not having to care about errors every time
we want a path.
We now always re-use the state of the repo if we're returning to it, and we always reset the windows to their default tabs.
We reset to default tabs because it's easy to implement. If people want to:
* have tab states be retained when switching
* have tab states specific to the current repo retained when switching back
Then we'll need to revisit this
