For all videos but the first video in the readme we want to use mp4 because it's faster, better quality,
smaller, and allows you to play/pause (don't quote me on the smaller part).
HOWEVER: github won't let us reference mp4s stored in our repo from the readme, like it does for gifs
(who knows why). This is annoying because it prevents us from easily re-recording things if the UI
changes. So I've got the logic for recording to mp4 but I'm thinking of sticking to gifs for now
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.
As discussed in https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/pull/2599, it
makes more sense to have the user specify whether they want verbose
commits from their own git config, rather than lazygit config.
This means that we can remove all the code (including test coverage)
associated with the custom verbose flag, and lazygit will just inherit
the .gitconfig settings automatically.
We have a use-case to rebind 'm' to the merge action in the branches panel. There's three ways to handle this:
1) For all global keybindings, define a per-panel key that invokes it
2) Give a name to all controller actions and allow them to be invoked in custom commands
3) Allow checking for merge conflicts after running a custom command so that users can add their own 'git merge' custom command
that matches the in-built action
Option 1 is hairy, Option 2 though good for users introduces new backwards compatibility issues that I don't want to do
right now, and option 3 is trivially easy to implement so that's what I'm doing.
I've put this under an 'after' key so that we can add more things later. I'm imagining other things like being able to
move the cursor to a newly added item etc.
I considered always running this hook by default but I'd rather not: it's matching on the output text and I'd rather something
like that be explicitly opted-into to avoid cases where we erroneously believe that there are conflicts.
The global counter approach is easy to understand but it's brittle and depends on implicit behaviour that is not very discoverable.
With a global counter, if any goroutine accidentally decrements the counter twice, we'll think lazygit is idle when it's actually busy.
Likewise if a goroutine accidentally increments the counter twice we'll think lazygit is busy when it's actually idle.
With the new approach we have a map of tasks where each task can either be busy or not. We create a new task and add it to the map
when we spawn a worker goroutine (among other things) and we remove it once the task is done.
The task can also be paused and continued for situations where we switch back and forth between running a program and asking for user
input.
In order for this to work with `git push` (and other commands that require credentials) we need to obtain the task from gocui when
we create the worker goroutine, and then pass it along to the commands package to pause/continue the task as required. This is
MUCH more discoverable than the old approach which just decremented and incremented the global counter from within the commands package,
but it's at the cost of expanding some function signatures (arguably a good thing).
Likewise, whenever you want to call WithWaitingStatus or WithLoaderPanel the callback will now have access to the task for pausing/
continuing. We only need to actually make use of this functionality in a couple of places so it's a high price to pay, but I don't
know if I want to introduce a WithWaitingStatusTask and WithLoaderPanelTask function (open to suggestions).
Given that we now persist search/filter states even after a side context loses focus, we need to make it really
clear to the user that the context is currently being searched/filtered
For consistency with the previous commit.
Note that this menu entry is used both for unstaged and for staged changes, and
for staged changes it is not quite accurate, as we are not discarding changes in
that case (just unstaging them). Not sure it's worth fixing this; it's still
better than "Delete", anyway.
The title was saying "Unstage lines", which was just wrong. The text said
"Delete lines", which can be seen as a bit misleading; we are only discarding
the changes to the selected lines, not deleting the lines themselves.
For consistency, rename the config variable skipUnstageLineWarning accordingly.
The menuFromCommand option is a little complicated, so I'm adding an easy way to just use the command output directly,
where each line becomes a suggestion, as-is.
Now that we support suggestions in the input prompt, there's less of a need for menuFromCommand, but it probably still
serves some purpose.
In future I want to support this filter/valueFormat/labelFormat thing for suggestions too. I would like to think a little more
about the interface though: is using a regex like we currently do really the simplest approach?
We have not been good at consistent casing so far. Now we use 'Sentence case' everywhere. EVERYWHERE.
Also Removing 'Lc' prefix from i18n field names: the 'Lc' stood for lowercase but now that everything
is in 'Sentence case' there's no need for the distinction.
I've got a couple lower case things I've kept: namely, things that show up in parentheses.
It defaults to {"master", "main"}, but can be set to whatever branch names
are used as base branches, e.g. {"master", "devel", "v1.0-hotfixes"}. It is
used for color-coding the shas in the commit list, i.e. to decide whether
commits are green or yellow.
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.
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.
