I've optimised for muscle memory backwards compatibility here:
- Outside interactive rebase: press 'f' then instead of a confirmation
panel, a menu appears where you can choose to keep the selected commit's
message
- Inside interactive rebase: press 'f' then press 'c' to see the menu
for keeping the message, where if you press 'c' again it will retain the
current message. so 'fcc' is the chord to press.
We're also now showing the -C flag (which is what enables the behaviour)
against the todo.
I've picked the 'c' keybinding because 'C' was taken and it corresponds
to the flag. Previously that showed a warning about a change in
keybinding for cherry picking but it's been ages since we've made that
change so I'm happy to retire it.
Not used yet, we pass an empty string everywhere, to match the previous
behavior. Just extracting this into a separate commit to make the next one
smaller.
Co-authored-by: Stefan Haller <stefan@haller-berlin.de>
It is possible to scroll the selection out of view using the mouse wheel; after
doing this, it would sometimes scroll into view by itself again, for example
when a background fetch occurred. In the files panel this would even happen
every 10s with every regular files refresh.
Fix this by adding a scrollIntoView parameter to HandleFocus, which is false by
default, and is only set to true from controllers that change the selection.
We move the selection down by the number of commits that were reverted (to keep
the same commits selected). However, this only happens after refreshing, which
has rendered the main view with the wrong commit, so we need to render it again
after moving the selection.
There are many other callers of MoveSelection in LocalCommitsController, but all
of them happen before the refresh. Revert is special because it needs to move
the selection after refreshing, e.g. when reverting the only commit of a branch.
Stashing doesn't affect submodules, so if you have a working copy that has
out-of-date submodules but no other changes, and then you revert or paste a
commit (or invoke one of the many other lazygit commands that auto-stash, e.g.
undo), lazygit would previously try to stash changes (which did nothing, but
also didn't return an error), perform the operation, and then pop the stash
again. If no stashes existed before, then this would only cause a confusing
error popup ("error: refs/stash@{0} is not a valid reference"), but if there
were stashes, this would try to pop the newest one of these, which is very
undesirable and confusing.
There's no reason not to allow these.
Technically we could enable a few more, but I chose not to because some might be
surprising or confusing in filtering mode. For example, creating a fixup commit
would work (shift-F), but the newly created commit might not show up if it
doesn't match the filter. Similarly, pressing `f` to fixup a commit into its
parent would work, but that parent commit might not be visible, so users might
expect to be fixing up into the next visible commit.
CheckMergeOrRebase calls Refresh already. However, it does an async refresh by
default, so we must turn this into a sync refresh so that moving the selection
down by one works even for the very first commit in history. Also, we must add
an explicit call to FocusLine so that the view selection is in sync with the
model selection; previously this was taken care of by the PostRefreshUpdate call
that happens as part of a refresh.
Refresh is one of those functions that shouldn't require error handling (similar
to triggering a redraw of the UI, see
https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/issues/3887).
As far as I see, the only reason why Refresh can currently return an error is
that the Then function returns one. The actual refresh errors, e.g. from the git
calls that are made to fetch data, are already logged and swallowed. Most of the
Then functions do only UI stuff such as selecting a list item, and always return
nil; there's only one that can return an error (updating the rebase todo file in
LocalCommitsController.startInteractiveRebaseWithEdit); it's not a critical
error if this fails, it is only used for setting rebase todo items to "edit"
when you start an interactive rebase by pressing 'e' on a range selection of
commits. We simply log this error instead of returning it.
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.
It's never called, the binding ListController.HandleGotoBottom wins.
The functionality of loading more commits is implemented by GetOnFocus, and this
way it works not only for '>', but also for other navigation keys like page
down.
This in itself is not an improvement, because hashes are unique (they are shared
between real commits and rebase todos, but there are so few of those that it
doesn't matter). However, it becomes an improvement once we also store parent
hashes in the same pool; but the real motivation for this change is to also
reuse the hash pointers in Pipe objects later in the branch. This will be a big
win because in a merge-heavy git repo there are many more Pipe instances than
commits.
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.
It looks like enums.go was supposed to be file that collects a bunch of enums,
but actually there's only one in there, and since it has methods, it deserves to
be in a file of its own, named after the type.
Rewording a commit at the beginning of a long branch can take very long;
without this change, the commit message panel would stay visible with a blinking
cursor during that time, which is very confusing.
This has the slight downside that it will say "Rebasing" in the lower right
corner until the operation is done; but we already have this problem when doing
custom patch operations, or dropping changes from a commit, so it's not new, and
we can think about how to fix all these another time.
WithGpgHandling already does an async refresh when done, so there's no need to
do one here for the case of amending the head commit. On top of that,
WithGpgHandling uses WithWaitingStatus and works in the background, so the
Refresh here would come too early anyway.
All this does is clear the preserved commit message; however, we open the commit
message panel with PreserveMessage: false when rewording, so this is not
necessary.
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.
In 67b8ef449c we changed the "edit" command to insert a "break" after the
selected commit, rather than setting the selected todo to "edit". The reason for
doing this was that it now works for merge commits too.
Back then, I claimed "In most cases the behavior is exactly the same as before."
Unfortunately that's not true, there are two reasons why the previous behavior
was better (both are demonstrated by tests earlier in this branch):
- when editing the last commit of a branch in the middle of a stack of branches,
we are now missing the update-ref todo after it, which means that amending the
commit breaks the stack
- it breaks auto-amending (see the added test earlier in this branch for an
explanation)
For these reasons, we are going back to the previous approach of setting the
selected commit to "edit" whenever possible, i.e. unless it's a merge commit.
The only scenario where this could still be a problem is when you have a stack
of branches, and the last commit of one of the branches in the stack is a merge
commit, and you try to edit that. In my experience with stacked branches this is
very unlikely, in almost all cases my stacked branches are linear.
