A common issue I have is that I want to move a commit from the top of my branch
all the way down to the first commit on the branch. To do that, I need to navigate
down to the first commit on my branch, press 'e' to start an interactive rebase,
then navigate back up to the top of the branch, then move my commit back down to
the base. This is annoying.
Similarly annoying is moving the commit one-by-one without explicitly starting
an interactive rebase, because then each individual step is its own rebase which
takes a while in aggregate.
This PR allows you to press 'i' from the commits view to start an interactive
rebase from an 'appropriate' base. By appropriate, we mean that we want to start
from the HEAD and stop when we reach the first merge commit or commit on the main
branch. This may end up including more commits than you need, but it doesn't make
a difference.
For some bizarre reason `pkg/integration/tests/filter_by_path/cli_arg.go` is failing as of 8c716184 like so:
```
test_lazygit
Usage:
test_lazygit [git-arg]
Positional Variables:
git-arg Panel to focus upon opening lazygit. Accepted values (based on git terminology): status, branch, log, stash. Ignored if --filter arg is passed.
Flags:
-h --help Displays help with available flag, subcommand, and positional value parameters.
-p --path Path of git repo. (equivalent to --work-tree=<path> --git-dir=<path>/.git/)
-f --filter Path to filter on in `git log -- <path>`. When in filter mode, the commits, reflog, and stash are filtered based on the given path, and some operations are restricted
-v --version Print the current version
-d --debug Run in debug mode with logging (see --logs flag below). Use the LOG_LEVEL env var to set the log level (debug/info/warn/error) (default: false)
-l --logs Tail lazygit logs (intended to be used when `lazygit --debug` is called in a separate terminal tab)
-c --config Print the default config
-cd --print-config-dir Print the config directory
-ucd --use-config-dir override default config directory with provided directory
-w --work-tree equivalent of the --work-tree git argument
-g --git-dir equivalent of the --git-dir git argument
-ucf --use-config-file Comma separated list to custom config file(s)
Unknown arguments supplied: filterFile
```
where the CLI args are:
```
([]string) (len=5 cap=5) {
(string) (len=25) "/tmp/lazygit/test_lazygit",
(string) (len=6) "-debug",
(string) (len=108) "--use-config-dir=/Users/jesseduffieldduffield/repos/lazygit/test/_results/filter_by_path/cli_arg/used_config",
(string) (len=2) "-f",
(string) (len=10) "filterFile"
}
```
This appears to be a bug in flaggy itself. I've updated to the latest version but it still breaks. Bizarrely it works fine on CI and
only fails locally. Running lazygit locally with `lg -f pkg/gui/controllers/helpers/refresh_helper.go` it works fine. So I don't
know what's going on there. At any rate, I'm just going to get the test passing by passing `-f=filterFile` as a single argument.
We need to fetch our list of tests both outside of our test binary and within. We need
to get the list from within so that we can run the code that drives the test and runs
assertions. To get the list of tests we need to know where the root of the lazygit repo
is, given that the tests live in files under that root.
So far, we've used this GetLazyRootDirectory() function for that, but it assumes that
we're not in a test directory (it just looks for the first .git dir it can find). Because
we didn't want to properly fix this before, we've been setting the working directory of
the test command to the lazygit root, and using the --path CLI arg to override it when
the test itself ran. This was a terrible hack.
Now, we're passing the lazygit root directory as an env var to the integration test, so
that we can set the working directory to the actual path of the test repo; removing the
need to use the --path arg.
The algorithm works by blaming the deleted lines, so if a hunk contains only
added lines, we can only hope that it also belongs in the same commit. Warn the
user about this.
Note: the warning might be overly agressive, we'll have to see if this is
annoying. The reason is that it depends on the diff context size whether added
lines go into their own hunk or are grouped together with other added or deleted
lines into one hunk. However, our algorithm uses a diff context size of 0,
because that makes it easiest to parse the diff; this results in hunks having
only added lines more often than what the user sees. For example, moving a line
of code down by two lines will likely result in a single hunk for the user, but
in two hunks for our algorithm. On the other hand, being this strict makes the
warning consistent. We could consider using the user's diff context size in the
algorithm, but then it would depend on the current context size whether the
warning appears, which could be confusing. Plus, it would make the algorithm
quite a bit more complicated.
There are two possible fixes for this bug, and they differ in behavior when
rewording a commit. The one I chose here always splits at the first line feed,
which means that for an improperly formatted commit message such as this one:
This is a very long multi-line subject,
which you shouldn't really use in git.
And this is the body (we call it "description" in lazygit).
we split after the first line instead of after the first paragraph. This is
arguably not what the original author meant, but splitting after the first
paragraph doesn't really work well in lazygit, because we would try to put both
lines into the one-line subject field of the message panel, and you'd only see
the second and not even know that there are more.
The other potential fix would have been to join subject and description with two
line feeds instead of one in JoinCommitMessageAndDescription; this would have
fixed our bug in the same way, but would result in splitting the above message
after the second line instead of the first. I think that's worse, so I decided
for the first fix.
While we're at it, simplify the code a little bit; strings.Cut is documented to
return (s, "") when the separator is not found, so there's no need to do this on
our side.
We do have to trim spaces on the description now, to support the regular reword
case where subject and body are separated by a blank line.
SplitCommitMessageAndDescription splits at the first '\n\n' that it finds (if
there is one), which in this case is between the two paragraphs of the
description. This is wrong.
Previously there was no way to render a view's search status without also moving the cursor
to the current search match. This caused issues where we wanted to display the status
after leaving the view and coming back, or when beginning a new search from within the
view.
This commit separates the two use cases so we only move the cursor when we're actually
selecting the next search match
This can be useful when you know that a cherry-picked commit would conflict at
the tip of your branch, but doesn't at the beginning of the branch (or
somewhere in the middle). In that case you want to be able to edit the commit
before where you want to insert the cherry-picked commits, and then paste to
insert them into the todo list at that point.
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.
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.)
