Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
The idea here is that in the git CLI you will often want to checkout a
remote branch like origin/blah by doing `git checkout blah`. That will
automatically create a local branch named blah that tracks origin/blah.
Previously in the suggestions view when checking out a branch by name,
we would only show local branches and remote branches like origin/blah
but wouldn't show blah as an option (assuming no local branch existed
with that name). This meant users would checkout origin/blah and git
would check out that branch as a detached head which is rarely what you
actually want.
Now we give them both options. The alternative approach we could have
taken is to still show the branch as origin/blah but then ask if the
user wants to check out the branch as detached or as a local branch
tracking the remote branch. That approach is certainly more versatile,
but it's also something you can do already by going to the remote branch
directly via the remotes view. Admittedly, my approach involves less
work.
|
|
- **PR Description**
Extend the submodules tab to show not only the top-level submodules, but
also their nested submodules, recursively.
Fixes #3306.
|
|
|
|
This will make the next commit slightly simpler.
|
|
|
|
The test shows that it actually doesn't work when the submodule name is
different from its path. We'll fix this in the next commit.
|
|
In most real-world scenarios, name and path are usually the same. They don't
have to be though, and it's important to make sure we use the right one when
passing arguments to git commands, so change the tests to have different name
and path.
|
|
It seems to cause more confusion than it helps.
Fixes #2819.
|
|
It seems to cause more confusion than it helps.
|
|
This resolves the regression from the last gocui bump that strikethrough
no longer worked.
Fixes #3355.
|
|
This resolves the regression from the last gocui bump that strikethrough no
longer worked.
|
|
When doing a non-interactive rebase using a version of git earlier than
2.26, or by explicitly calling `git -c rebase.backend=apply rebase`,
lazygit can display the pending todos by parsing the numbered patch
files in `.git/rebase-apply/`. Unfortunately, support for this has been
broken for more than three years because of the change in 682db77401e
(the string literal "normal" should have been changed to
REBASE_MODE_NORMAL instead of REBASE_MODE_MERGING).
It's not an important bug since you can only get into this situation by
doing a rebase outside of lazygit, and then only with a pretty old git
version or by using very uncommon git options. So instead of fixing the
bug, just remove the code.
|
|
When doing a non-interactive rebase using a version of git earlier than 2.26, or
by explicitly calling `git -c rebase.backend=apply rebase`, lazygit can display
the pending todos by parsing the numbered patch files in `.git/rebase-apply/`.
Unfortunately, support for this has been broken for more than three years
because of the change in 682db77401e (the string literal "normal" should have
been changed to REBASE_MODE_NORMAL instead of REBASE_MODE_MERGING).
It's not an important bug since you can only get into this situation by doing a
rebase outside of lazygit, and then only with a pretty old git version or by
using very uncommon git options. So instead of fixing the bug, just remove the
code.
|
|
- **PR Description**
Fix a bug where merging would fail with an error message when you try to
put more than one argument in the `git.merging.args` config. This broke
with 25f8b0337e.
Fixes #3334.
|
|
This makes it possible again to pass multiple arguments, for example
"--ff-only --autostash". This won't work correctly if you want to use
an argument that contains a space, but it's very unlikely that people
will want to do that, so I think this is good enough.
|
|
We are currently passing the whole string as a single argument, which doesn't
work of course.
|
|
(#3340)
- **PR Description**
When doing an interactive rebase of a stack of branches with the
`rebase.updateRefs` git config set to true, you get `update-ref` todos
between the "pick" items. In this situation we would still show the
branch head icon for each pick item that used to be the head of a
branch. This is confusing, especially when you want to move a new commit
to the head of a branch in the middle of the stack. Consider the
following scenario:
<img width="410" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/assets/1225667/438b7157-e51e-48fb-95a9-b67039a7ad30">
Here we have made a new commit at the top of the stack, entered
interactive rebase, and moved the commit down to the head of the second
branch. Now it sits between the commit that shows the branch icon of the
second branch, and the update-ref item for the second branch. This is
super confusing, and it's simply better to not show branch icons for
pick entries. That's what this PR does.
We do show the icons if the `rebase.updateRefs` config is off, because
otherwise there would be no indication of where the branches start and
end. Of course, changing anything in this case will destroy the stack,
so maybe it would be better to hide the icons in this case too to make
this more obvious. I'm unsure about that.
|
|
The additional branch head icon is more confusing than useful in this situation.
The update-ref entries show very clearly where the branch heads will go when
continuing the rebase; the information where the branch heads used to be before
the rebase is not really needed here, and just makes the display more confusing.
I'm not adding more tests here because the changes to the existing tests
demonstrate the change clearly enough.
|
|
Name it after what it is rather than what it is used for. In the next commit we
will use it for another condition.
|
|
|
|
The helix binary seems to be called "helix" on some distributions (e.g.
Arch), but "hx" on others (e.g. Fedora). Provide presets for both, so
that auto-detection from $EDITOR works.
See
https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/issues/2624#issuecomment-1966509979.
|
|
The helix binary seems to be called "helix" on some distributions (e.g. Arch),
but "hx" on others (e.g. Fedora). Provide presets for both, so that
auto-detection from $EDITOR works.
|
|
- **PR Description**
A common workflow for me is to create a fixup commit from only some of
my current changes; to do that, I enter a file, stage a few hunks, and
then want to invoke ctrl-f to find the base commit for these changes.
Currently I need to esc back to the files panel in order to do that;
it's more convenient to be able to do this right from the staging panel.
Labelled as "ignore-for-release" because the ctrl-f feature has only
been added after the last release, so no release notes needed for this
change.
|
|
A common workflow for me is to create a fixup commit from only some of my
current changes; to do that, I enter a file, stage a few hunks, and then want to
invoke ctrl-f to find the base commit for these changes. Currently I need to esc
back to the files panel in order to do that; it's more convenient to be able to
do this right from the staging panel.
|
|
These started to pop up in my editor after I installed an update of
gopls, I think.
|
|
These started to pop up in my editor after I installed an update of gopls, I
think. It's unfortunate that we don't see them on CI.
|
|
Bump our gocui dependency, which in turn bumps tcell to v2.7.1, which
should fix problems with multibyte characters on Windows.
Fixes #2741.
|
|
The main change here is to bump tcell to v2.7.1, which should fix problems with
multibyte characters on Windows.
|
|
- **PR Description**
This PR introduces a new feature to the commit view, allowing users to
filter commits based on the author's name or email address. Similar to
the existing path filtering functionality, accessible through `<c-s>`,
this feature allows users to filter the commit history by the currently
selected commit's author if the commit view is focused, or by typing in
the author's name or email address.
This feature adds an entry to the filtering menu, to provide users with
a familiar and intuitive experience
![filter-by-author](https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/assets/3098462/5b00a716-e432-4204-8568-0e93b1411bc7)
- **Please check if the PR fulfils these requirements**
* [x] Cheatsheets are up-to-date (run `go generate ./...`)
* [x] Code has been formatted (see
[here](https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#code-formatting))
* [x] Tests have been added/updated (see
[here](https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/blob/master/pkg/integration/README.md)
for the integration test guide)
* [x] Text is internationalised (see
[here](https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#internationalisation))
* [x] Docs (specifically `docs/Config.md`) have been updated if
necessary
* [x] You've read through your own file changes for silly mistakes etc
|
|
This commit introduces a new feature to the commit view, allowing users
to filter commits based on the author's name or email address. Similar
to the existing path filtering functionality, accessible through <c-s>,
this feature allows users to filter the commit history by the currently
selected commit's author if the commit view is focused, or by typing in
the author's name or email address.
This feature adds an entry to the filtering menu, to provide users with
a familiar and intuitive experience
|
|
Calling "git reset" on the command line (without further arguments)
defaults to --mixed, which is reason enough to make it the default for
us, too.
But I also find myself using --mixed more often than --soft. The main
use case for me is that I made a bunch of WIP commits, and want to turn
them into real commits when I'm done hacking. I select the last commit
before the WIP commits and reset to it, leaving all changes of all those
commits in the working directory. Since I want to start staging things
from there, I prefer those modifications to be unstaged at that point,
which is what --mixed does.
|
|
|
|
Calling "git reset" on the command line (without further arguments) defaults to
--mixed, which is reason enough to make it the default for us, too.
But I also find myself using --mixed more often than --soft. The main use case
for me is that I made a bunch of WIP commits, and want to turn them into real
commits when I'm done hacking. I select the last commit before the WIP commits
and reset to it, leaving all changes of all those commits in the working
directory. Since I want to start staging things from there, I prefer those
modifications to be unstaged at that point, which is what --mixed does.
|
|
- **PR Description**
fixes #2856, #2794, #818
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(e.g. `external` or `noprefix`). (#3222)
- **PR Description**
I encountered the problem that I couldn't extract changes into a new
commit because I had difftastic as an external git tool configured.
Add `diff.noprefix=false` config Option and also specify `--no-ext-diff`
when doing the `git diff` after applying a patch.
This fixes #3107.
Though, there might be other config options that can cause problems, but
fixing these common cases should be an improvement nevertheless.
|
|
The test would fail without the fixes in the previous commits; even if
only one of the configs is set.
|
|
This fixes problems with being able to stage things in a custom patch correctly.
|
|
|
|
- **PR Description**
Keep the sort order stable when filtering lists of things sorted by date
(branches, stashes, reflog entries).
|
|
|
|
For some lists it is useful to keep the same sort order when filtering (rather
than sorting by best match like we usually do). Add an optional function to
FilteredList to make this possible, and use it whenever we show lists of things
sorted by date (branches, stashes, reflog entries), as well as menu items
because this allows us to keep the section headers in the keybindings menu,
which is useful for understanding what you are looking at when filtering.
|
|
We'll need this to use the slices.Sort function in the next commit. It would
also be possible to use sort.Ints instead, but it's slower.
|
|
After #3283 we need to read more lines initially so that the scrollbar
goes to its minimal height of 1 for long diffs. Without this, it would
start with a height of 2 and then become smaller after you scroll down
half the window height.
It does mean that we need to read twice the number of lines initially
(up to the limit of 5000). I think it's worth it, I find the incorrect
initial size confusing.
|
|
After #3283 we need to read more lines initially so that the scrollbar goes to
its minimal height of 1 for long diffs. Without this, it would start with a
height of 2 and then become smaller after you scroll down half the window
height.
|
|
- **PR Description**
Fix order problems when saving custom commands history
This fixes two problems:
- each time the custom commands panel was opened, the history of commands would
be shown in reversed order compared to last time. (The reason is that
lo.Reverse modifies the slice in place rather than just returning a new,
reversed slice.)
- when executing a previous command again (either by typing it in again, or by
picking it from the history), it should move to the beginning of the history,
but didn't.
We fix this by storing the history in reversed order (as the user sees it in
the panel), this makes the logic simpler. We just have to prepend rather
than append newly added commands now.
While this is theoretically a breaking change, it's not worth bothering because
the order was wrong for existing users in 50% of the cases anyway.
|
|
This fixes two problems:
- each time the custom commands panel was opened, the history of commands would
be shown in reversed order compared to last time. (The reason is that
lo.Reverse modifies the slice in place rather than just returning a new,
reversed slice.)
- when executing a previous command again (either by typing it in again, or by
picking it from the history), it should move to the beginning of the history,
but didn't.
We fix this by storing the history in reversed order (as the user sees it in
the panel), this makes the logic simpler. We just have to prepend rather
than append newly added commands now.
While this is theoretically a breaking change, it's not worth bothering because
the order was wrong for existing users in 50% of the cases anyway.
|