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.
Not much of a change in behavior, because moving merge commits was already not
possible. However, it failed with a cryptic error message ("Todo fa1afe1 not
found in git-rebase-todo"), so disable it properly instead.
We allow deleting remote branches (or local and remote branches) only if *all*
selected branches have one.
We show the a warning about force-deleting as soon as at least one of the
selected branches is not fully merged.
The added test only tests a few of the most interesting cases; I didn't try to
cover the whole space of possible combinations, that would have been too much.
When creating a PR against a selected branch (via O = "create pull request
options"), the user will first be asked to select a remote (if there is more
than one). After that, the suggestion area is populated with all remote branches
at that origin - instead of all local ones. After all, creating a PR against a
branch that doesn't exist on the remote won't work.
Please note that for the "PR is not filed against 'origin' remote" use case
(e.g. when contributing via a fork that is 'origin' to a GitHub project that is
'upstream'), the opened URL will not be correct. This is not a regression and
will be fixed in an upcoming PR.
Fixes#1826.
In other views that show lists of commits (reflog and stash) it doesn't make
sense to show a range diff of selected entries because they don't form a linear
sequence, so we keep the previous behavior of showing the diff for the free end
of the selection range in those view.
The same applies to the commits view if the selection range includes rebasing
todos; these can have an arbitrary order, and a range diff doesn't make sense
for those.
- Introduced a new optional user config command, allBranchesLogCmds
- When pressing 'a' in the Status view, cycle between non-empty, non-identical log commands
- There will always be at least one command to run, since allBranhesLogCmd has a default
- Update documentation & write an integration test
- Update translation string
No content changes yet, because nobody has edited anything in Crowdin so far.
However, this changes a few `\u003` to `<` (pretty sure that was an artefact of
how we manually generated the json files in #3649), and it removes all the
translations that are identical to the English version, which I guess is a good
thing (but doesn't make a difference in practice).
I was looking for empty strings in en.json, that's how I found this one. It
resulted in an empty log entry when adding a co-author to an existing commit.
It seems that the embed.FS always uses foreward slashes, even on
Windows.
This not only affected generating the cheatsheets, but also loading a
translation file in production.
We write a hacky, one-off script to do that. We need this script only once, so
we don't bother polishing it much. We'll re-purpose it later in the branch to
convert the English translation set to JSON; that is an operation that we need
to do regularly in the future.
Strike it through if not applicable. This will hopefully help with confusion
about the meaning of "all" in the "Discard all changes" entry; some people
misunderstand this to mean all changes in the working copy. Seeing the "Discard
unstaged changes" item next to it hopefully makes it clearer that "all" is meant
in contrast to that.
Unfortunately it isn't possible to delete them. This would often be useful, but
our todo rewriting mechanisms rely on being able to find todos by some
identifier (hash for pick, ref for update-ref), and exec todos don't have a
unique identifier.
Put it into the individual menu items instead.
Again, this is necessary because we are going to add another entry to the menu
that is independent of the selected branch.
This broke with 81b497d186 (#3387). In that PR I claimed that we never want to
ask for force-pushing if the server rejected the update, on the assumption that
this can only happen because the remote tracking branch is not up to date, and
users should just fetch in this case. However, I didn't realize it's even
possible to have a branch whose upstream branch is not stored locally; in this
case we can't tell ahead of time whether a force push is going to be necessary,
so we _have_ to rely on the server response to find out. But we only want to do
that in this specific case, so this is not quite an exact revert of 81b497d186.
