The test shows a misbehavior: even though the diff shows "-one" and "+three",
meaning that "three" is the state we want to check out, we get "one". The reason
is that the checkout file command doesn't pay attention to range selections, it
only looks at the "moving end" of the range. Had we created the range by
selecting "two" and then pressed shift-up to "three", we would have gotten the
expected result.
Add verify flag
Add and update integration tests
Rename verify to forceSkipHooks
Adapt CommitSkipHooks integration test to actually use a hook
Remove forceSkipHooks param from OnConfirm et al
Simplify tests
Assert the entire lines using Equals instead of Contains. This makes the tests a
bit easier to read, and it makes it much easier to decide how they need to be
changed when we change the layout (like we do in the last commit of this
branch).
It is true that this requires changing all these tests for any future UI
changes, but I think this is a good price to pay; those adaptions are trivial
and can be done without thinking.
I'm pretty sure that the check for the main view was meant to be done with the
commit selected in the commits panel, not with the first file of the commit
files view selected, so it was pressing enter too early. It's pure coincidence
that the test worked.
This is useful for copying the entire content of the selected file as it was at
the selected commit.
We only add it to the commit files panel; it is not needed in the files panel,
because there you can simply press "e" to edit the file.
This is very similar to the same menu in the Files panel, except that it works
on whatever diff is currently shown in the main view, including range diffs
either in diffing mode (shift-W), or from a range selection of commits.
Change our fake clipboard command to not append a linefeed; that's closer to
what the production code does.
This allows us to use Equals instead of Contains for checking the clipboard
contents.
Finally, use FileSystem().FileContent() to assert the clipboard contents,
instead of selecting the clipboard file and then checking the diff view.
Jesse's comment from https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/issues/4237:
We recently added a new option to check out a commit's branch from within the
commits, reflog, and sub-commits panels:
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a5cf3f2-6803-4709-ae5a-e4addc061012
After using it for some time, I find it annoying that the default option has
changed. I rarely find myself wanting to check out a branch from the commits
panel, and it's rarer still to want to check out a branch from the reflog and
sub-commits panel. Although there may be use cases for this, it is jarring that
something you can always do (checkout the commit) is harder to do than something
that you can sometimes do (checkout the branch).
We've also had a user complain (see
https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/pull/4117) about their muscle-memory
being broken by the recent change, and I have also fallen victim to this. I
don't think that the new branch checkout option is sufficiently useful to
dislodge the existing keybinding, so let's swap them.
The code that tries to reselect the same branch again uses GetItems, which in
case of filtering is the filtered list. After replacing the branches slice with
a new one, the filtered list is no longer up to date, so we must reapply the
filter before working with it. It so happens that refreshView does that, so
simply call that before setting the selection again; I don't think the order
matters in this case. Otherwise we'd have to insert another call to
ReApplyFilter before the call to GetItems, which we can avoid this way.
Note that this doesn't actually make anything work better in the case of
deleting a branch, since we can't reselect the deleted branch anyway of course.
But it avoids a possible crash if the branch that was deleted was the last one
in the unfiltered list.
I renamed the "Reset filter" item to "No filter" to make it look more like a
state than an action, so that it fits the radio button concept better.
When there are conflicts and we set the filter to show only conflicting files,
then none of the radio buttons light up, which is slightly strange. I guess it's
ok though.
This handles the situation where the user's own config says to not show
untracked files, as is often the case with bare repos managing a user's
dotfiles.
It has fields .To and .From (the hashes of the last and the first selected
commits, respectively), and it is useful for creating git commands that act on a
range of commits.
There are two ways to jump to the editor on a specific line: pressing `e` in the
staging or patch building panels, or clicking on a hyperlink in a delta diff. In
both cases, this works perfectly in the unstaged changes view, but in other
views (either staged changes, or an older commit) it can often jump to the wrong
line; this happens when there are further changes to the file being viewed in
later commits or in unstaged changes.
This commit fixes this so that you end up on the right line in these cases.
When pressing `e` on line 5 in a diff of an older commit, we expect it to take
us to line 5 in that file. But we end up on line 2, because the file had further
changes both in newer commits, and in the unstaged changes of the working copy.
This updates gocui to include https://github.com/jesseduffield/gocui/pull/68 and
https://github.com/jesseduffield/gocui/pull/69, which changes views to not have
an extra blank line at the end when content ending in a newline character is
written to them. This makes text views more consistent with list views, which
don't have a blank line after the last list entry either.
The easiest way to do that is to rename the local branch after pushing.
This shows various levels of brokenness for the reset and rebase to upstream
commands: both menu entries display the wrong upstream branch name in the menu
(the local one rather than the remote one); executing the rebase command works
correctly though, the rebase command uses the right branch name. Resetting
fails, though.
We'll fix this in the next commit.
It should have been half-screen from the get-go. I think I just used
full-screen to make demos look nicer. Now that we have a CLI arg for the
screen mode we can make use of that in the demos.
When the user checks out a commit which has a local branch ref attached
to it, they can select between checking out the branch or checking out
the commit as detached head.
Sometimes we populate the commit message panel with a pre-created commit
message. The two cases where this happens is:
- you type `w` to commit, in which case we put the skipHookPrefix in the subject
- you have a commitPrefix pattern, in which case we match it against the branch
name and populate the subject with the replacement string if it matches
In either case, if you have a preserved commit message, we use that.
Now, when you use either of these and then cancel, we preserve that initial,
unchanged message and reuse it the next time you commit. This has two problems:
it strips spaces, which is a problem for the commitPrefix patterns, which often
end with a space. And also, when you change your config to experiment with
commitPrefix patterns, the change seemingly doesn't take effect, which can be
very confusing.
To fix both of these problems, only preserve the commit message when it is not
identical to the initial message.
The test demonstrates that the behavior is undesirable right now: we move the
commit only past the update-ref todo of branch1, which means the order of
commits stays the same and only the branch head icon moves up by one. However,
we move the selection down by one, so the wrong commit is selected now. This is
especially bad if you type a bunch of ctrl-j quickly in a row, because now you
are moving the wrong commit.
There are two possible ways to fix this:
1) keep the moving behavior the same, but don't change the selection
2) change the behavior so that we move the commit not only past the update-ref,
but also past the next real commit.
You could argue that 1) is the more desirable fix, as it gives you more control
over where exactly the moved commit goes; however, it is much trickier to
implement, so we go with 2) for now (and that's what the commented-out
"EXPECTED" section documents here). If users need more fine-grained control,
they can always enter an interactive rebase first.
For non-merge commits we change "pick" to "drop" when we delete them. We do this
so that we can use the same code for dropping a commit no matter whether we are
in an interactive rebase or not. (If we aren't, we could just as well delete the
pick line from the todo list instead of setting it to "drop", but if we are, it
is better to keep the line around so that the user can change it back to "pick"
if they change their mind.)
However, merge commits can't be changed to "drop", so we have to delete them
from the todo file. We add a new daemon instruction that does this.
We still don't allow deleting a merge commit from within an interactive rebase.
The reason is that we don't show the "label" and "reset" todos in lazygit, so
deleting a merge commit would leave the commits from the branch that is being
merged in the list as "pick" commits, with no indication that they are going to
be dropped because they are on a different branch, and the merge commit that
would have brought them in is gone. This could be very confusing.
