Some tests assert that a specific commit subject does or doesn't occur
in the main view; interactive_rebase/outside_rebase_range_select.go is
an example for this, it asserts `t.Views().Main().Content(
DoesNotContain("commit 06"))`. The problem with this kind of assertion
and our test commit naming scheme is that the diff view begins with a
"commit <hash>" line, and when that hash happens to start with "06" the
assertion matched it and failed spuriously. This was usually masked by
our MaxAttempts=2 that we currently use for integration tests (it's
quite unlikely that the commit gets a hash beginning with "06" twice in
a row). However, we want to get to a state where we can set MaxAttempts
to 1, so make this more robust by changing our naming scheme.
This will put whatever git's default merge variant is as the first menu item,
and add a second item which is the opposite (no-ff if the default is ff, and
vice versa).
If users prefer to always have the same option first no matter whether it's
applicable, they can make ff always appear first by setting git's "merge.ff"
config to "true" or "only", or by setting lazygit's "git.merging.args" config to
"--ff" or "--ff-only"; if they want no-ff to appear first, they can do that by
setting git's "merge.ff" config to "false", or by setting lazygit's
"git.merging.args" config to "--no-ff". Which of these they choose depends on
whether they want the config to also apply to other git clients including the
cli, or only to lazygit.
As part of making lazygit more discoverable, there are certain keys which you almost certainly
need to press when you're in a given mode e.g. 'v' to paste commits when cherry-picking. This
commit prominently shows these keybinding suggestions alongside the others in the option view.
I'm using the same colours for these keybindings as is associated with the mode elsewhere e.g.
yellow for rebasing and cyan for cherry-picking. The cherry-picking one is a bit weird because
we also use cyan text to show loaders and app status at the bottom left so it may be confusing,
but I haven't personally found it awkward from having tested it out myself.
Previously we would render these options whenever a new context was activated, but now that we
need to re-render options whenever a mode changes, I'm instead rendering them on each screen
re-render (i.e. in the layout function). Given how cheap it is to render this text, I think
it's fine performance-wise.
