The version choice is a little arbitrary, but see discussion at
https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/pull/4559#issuecomment-2876201680.
The main reason why I'm updating the version now is that versions before 2.27
had a bug with branch sorting, where sorting by -committerdate (which will be
our default soon) would sort branches that point at the same commit in reverse
alphabetical order rather than alphabetical order. While this is only slightly
annoying but not a huge deal for users, it makes maintaining our integration
tests across versions very hard. So I wanted to update to at least 2.27 to get
around this problem, and went with 2.32 after the discussion linked to above.
The choice of which versions to run integration tests on is pretty arbitrary
too, I just picked some at random which are about 5 to 6 minor versions apart.
These were found by commenting out the initialization of the struct literal in
EnglishTranslationSet.TranslationSet(), and then running
$ punused pkg/i18n/**/*.go
Punused can be installed with `go install github.com/bep/punused@latest`.
For the case of creating a new branch by moving commits to it, we were using the
current (old) branch name in the stash name; change this to use the new name
instead.
Unlike moving a patch to the index, applying or reverting a patch didn't
auto-stash, which means that applying a patch when there's a modified (but
unstaged) file in the working tree would error out with the message "error:
file1: does not match index", regardless of whether those modifications conflict
with the patch or not.
To fix this, we *could* add auto-stashing like we do for the "move patch to
index" command. However, in this case we rather simply stage the affected files
(after asking for confirmation). This has a few advantages:
- it only changes the staging state of those files that are contained in the
patch (whereas auto-stashing always changes all files to unstaged)
- it doesn't unnecessarily show a confirmation if none of the modified files are
affected by the patch
- if the patch conflicts with the modified files, the conflicts were "backwards"
("ours" was the patch, "theirs" the modified file); it is more logical if "ours"
is the current state of the file, and "theirs" is the patch.
It's a little unfortunate that the behavior isn't exactly the same as for "move
patch to index", but for that one we do need the auto-stash because of the
rebase that runs behind the scenes.
Previously we would call pullFiles() from the pick() handler if we were not in a
rebase, assuming that the default keybinding for both is "p". This needn't be
the case of course, if the user has remapped one or the other.
The consequence of this was that swapping the keybindings for "pullFiles" and
"pushFiles" would work in all panels except the Commits panel (unless "pick" was
also remapped in the same way).
Fix this by using the new AllowFurtherDispatching mechanism of DisabledReasons
to pass the keybinding on to the next handler.
The default binding for ConfirmInEditor is <a-enter>, which has two problems:
- some terminal emulators don't support it, including the default terminal on
Mac (Terminal.app)
- on Windows it is bound to toggling full-screen
Ideally we would use <c-enter> instead (and Command-Enter on Mac), but neither
is possible without https://github.com/gdamore/tcell/issues/671, so for the time
being add an alternate keybinding which works everywhere.
Show both bindings in the footer of the commit description panel if they are
both non-null. While we're at it, fix the footer for the case where either or
both of the keybindings are set to <disabled>.
And finally, change "commit" to "submit" in that footer; we use the same panel
also for creating tags, in which case "commit" is not quite right.
This is very similar to what we are doing for staging or discarding hunks in the
Files panel. Git doesn't allow applying patches with a zero context size (unless
you use the --unidiff-zero option, which is discouraged).
In this commit this is only possible by pressing '0' in a side panel; we'll add
mouse clicking later in the branch.
Also, you can't really do anything in the focused view except press escape to
leave it again. We'll add some more functionality in a following commit.
We treat the .git/sequencer/todo file as read-only. Technically it seems it
would be possible to treat it as modifiable in the same way as
.git/rebase-merge/git-rebase-todo, effectively turning a cherry-pick or revert
that stops at a conflict into an interactive rebase; however, git itself doesn't
allow this (there is no "git cherry-pick --edit-todo"), so it seems safer not to
rely on it.
Theoretically it would be possible to allow modifying the rebase todos when a
cherry-pick or revert conflicts in the middle of a rebase. However, it would
introduce a bit of complexity to support this, as we would have to be able to
distinguish between rebasing todos and cherry-picking/reverting todos, which we
currently can't; it could also be a bit error-prone as far as edge cases are
concerned. And it's really a pretty uncommon situation, so it doesn't seem worth
it, and we just forbid all modifications to todos whenever we are cherry-picking
or reverting.
It is useful to see if the conflicted commit was a "pick" or an "edit". What's
more, we're about to add support for showing cherry-picks and reverts, and
seeing that a conflicted commit was a revert is important because its diff is
backwards compared to the diff of the conflicting files in the Files panel.
When you are in the middle of a rebase, and you cherry-pick a commit which
conflicts, it helps to be clear on whether you are prompted to continue the
cherry-pick or the rebase.
It is shown either when committing with `w`, or when typing the skipHooks prefix
if there is one. This should hopefully make it clearer when the hooks are run
and when they are not.
For the less common conflict types DD, AU, UA, DU, and UD, we would previously
only show "* Unmerged path" in the main view, which isn't helpful. Also, for
some of these we would split the main view and show this text both in the
unstaged changes and staged changes views, which is a bit embarrassing.
Improve this by offering more explanation about what's going on, and what the
most likely way to resolve the situation is for each case.
