When we use the one panel for the entire commit message, its tricky to have a keybinding both for adding a newline and submitting.
By having two panels: one for the summary line and one for the description, we allow for 'enter' to submit the message when done from the summary panel,
and 'enter' to add a newline when done from the description panel. Alt-enter, for those who can use that key combo, also works for submitting the message
from the description panel. For those who can't use that key combo, and don't want to remap the keybinding, they can hit tab to go back to the summary panel
and then 'enter' to submit the message.
We have some awkwardness in that both contexts (i.e. panels) need to appear and disappear in tandem and we don't have a great way of handling that concept,
so we just push both contexts one after the other, and likewise remove both contexts when we escape.
This begins a big refactor of moving more code out of the Gui struct into contexts, controllers, and helpers. We also move some code into structs in the
gui package purely for the sake of better encapsulation
more
and more
move rebase commit refreshing into existing abstraction
and more
and more
WIP
and more
handling clicks
properly fix merge conflicts
update cheatsheet
lots more preparation to start moving things into controllers
WIP
better typing
expand on remotes controller
moving more code into controllers
The way the `if` expression in `deactivateContext` was composed,
it was possible to have it to evaluate to `true` even though the
`view` variable was `nil`.
As far as I can tell, this seems to be only possible during tests.
Nonetheless, I think the expression looks more "correct" this way.
Hard to choose between the lock with a defer unlock in an anonymous function
vs just having an explicit unlock at the end with additional unlocks before
any early returns. The former is less error prone, but the former is much more
readable, especially if the anonymous function would have needed to return
an error value.
