Applying and reverse-applying custom patches must keep their staging,
dirty-worktree, and conflict behavior after the patch-building panel is
removed. Select the source lines in commit diffs while retaining every
assertion about the resulting working tree and conflict resolution.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
Editing a line whose working-tree position shifted, discarding part of
an added file, and giving up a patch by escaping are all behavior worth
retaining. Drive them through the focused commit diff so their coverage
no longer depends on the patch-building panel.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
Line-level patch moves must keep their behavior for added and deleted
files, adjacent additions, stacked branches, and conflicting earlier
destinations. Select those lines directly in the focused diff so only
the intended changes move and file-level metadata stays with the source
when appropriate.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
Moving a complete patch must preserve each file operation whether its
destination is a new commit before or after the source, or an existing
commit earlier or later in history. Build those patches as ranges over
the focused diff so the coverage survives removal of directory toggling
in the patch builder.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
Conflict and dirty-worktree handling happen after a custom patch is
built, but their tests must no longer rely on either explorer to build
it. Select whole and partial patches in the commit diff while preserving
the rebase-conflict and stash-restoration assertions.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
Patch movement still needs coverage for partial modifications, adjacent
additions, custom diff settings, and selections spanning files after the
patch-building panel goes away. Drive each through diff-line identities
while keeping the resulting commit and index assertions unchanged.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
The patch-building panel could move an added file as a file, while
selecting every visible change through the focused diff currently moves
only its content and leaves the empty file behind. Keep the intended
index state beside the current one so the replacement flow demonstrates
that gap before it is fixed.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
The commit rewrite triggered by moving a custom patch must keep the
user's place without relying on the patch-building panel. Build the
patch and leave the affected range selected in the focused diff so the
regression test follows the UI that survives this branch.
Co-Authored-By: GitHub Copilot <copilot@github.com>
The pane beside a commit's diff showed the patch being built from it by
assembling the text itself. That text could not be handed to a diff
renderer the way a diff can: a stdin filter might have coped, but a tool
that diffs two files could not. Its idea of how much context to show
around a hunk was also its own rather than git's.
Materialize the patch instead: write each of its files as it is before the
patch into one tree and as it is after into another, and let git diff the
two trees. The patch becomes a diff of real files, rendered by whatever
renders the rest of them, with git's own context around it. Its lines can
then be pointed at; taking them back out of the patch will need that.
The trees are named a and b, so that with git's own prefixes suppressed
the paths read like an ordinary diff's over the repo's own paths. They are
written when the patch changes rather than when it is shown, the patch
builder counting its own versions for that, and they go away with the
patch.
A renamed file is materialized under the name the patch expects to find it
under. Where the patch carries the rename, that is the name the file had
before, so the rename comes out as a rename. git names the trees
themselves in the two rename lines, having only the two paths to go by.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Removing lines from a commit, moving a custom patch out of one, undoing
either — none of it goes through the focused main view, so a selection over
that commit's diff was left where it was, painted over a rendering of a diff
that no longer exists.
Every render now asks whether it is showing a different diff than the one on
screen, which is what a rewritten commit looks like, and puts the selection
back on the change that has taken its place — the same reveal an action in
the view does for itself. It stands down for a render of the same diff,
where a selection, perhaps a range still being made, is exactly right as it
is, and for one that something more precise is already waiting to place.
The key a render is remembered under moves ahead of anything that might
change the command's arguments, so that it says which diff is being
rendered and nothing else.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Which pane a side of a file's diff appeared in depended on what else the file
had: the staged side had the lower pane while there were unstaged changes
above it, and took over the upper one when there weren't. So the same content
moved about, and which side a pane was showing was something the code had to
work out from the file's status rather than knowing from the pane.
Now each side has a pane of its own — unstaged above, staged below — shown
when there is something on it. A file with nothing unstaged shows its staged
changes in the lower pane alone, which then has the whole space, including
the label of the key that focuses it.
Nothing about this is visible to the user: the same diff appears in the same
place, with the same title and the same label, and the same keys focus and
scroll it. What it is for is the code, which no longer has to ask the file
what a pane is showing — and, once the diff can be staged from, no longer has
to make one key mean opposite things in the same pane.
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
When a rebase (or multi-commit cherry-pick or revert) stops with a
conflict, it is often useful to look at the diff of the "<-- CONFLICT"
commit to double-check that the conflict resolution matches the diff of
the original commit. To make that easier, select that commit
automatically.
When there is a single conflicting file left to be resolved, lazygit
dismisses the conflicted-files-only filter when the file no longer has
conflict markers. However, the selection moved to the top, which is
annoying because very often it is useful to look at that file's
resulting diff once more to confirm that conflicts were resolved
correctly, and finding it again can be cumbersome when there are many
changed files. So keep it selected.
Of course, this only helps for the last (or only) conflicted files; when
there are multiple, a resolved file disappears from the panel until all
are resolved, which makes it hard to double-check the resulting diffs.
Doing it afterwards is not easy because you'd have to remember which
files were conflicting. This needs a different solution, but for the
special case of only a single conflicting file this is already a big
improvement.
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.
When loading the files of a commit we passed --no-renames, so a rename
showed up as a separate delete and add rather than a single R entry.
That made it impossible to work with a rename that also modifies the
file: the modifications were spread across a full deletion and a full
addition instead of appearing as the handful of lines that actually
changed. The staging view already shows renames and lets you stage
their hunks, so there was no good reason for the patch builder to
differ; the flag was only there because the commit-file parser couldn't
cope with the rename record format.
Switch the commit-file loader and the per-file diff to --find-renames,
teach the parser about the rename record (a status followed by two
paths), and carry the previous path through the patch builder so the
diff for a rename is loaded with both paths, which is what makes git
emit the rename in the first place.
A whole-file selection keeps the rename in the header, so the rename
moves or is discarded together with the file's contents. A partial
selection instead strips the rename metadata and points the header at
the new path, so applying the patch only changes the contents and
leaves the rename in place; the blob index line is kept so that a 3-way
apply can still fall back to a blob merge.
Discarding a renamed file from a commit now discards both the new and
the old path, so the new file is removed and the old one is restored.
Changing the rename similarity threshold refreshes the commit files
panel too, not just the files panel, so that a rename can turn into a
delete and add or back. It is disabled while building a patch, however,
because the patch builder caches each file's diff by path and would
desync if a rename changed into a delete and add underneath it.
Finally, copying a file's diff from the commit files panel now passes
both paths for a rename, so the copied diff shows the rename instead of
a new-file add.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Change working tree files and commit files panels to use filtering
(reducing the list) instead of search (highlighting matches). This
matches the behavior of other filterable views.
The text filter matches against the full file path, not just the
filename, which is more useful for navigating large directory trees.
When toggling a directory for a custom patch while a text filter is
active, only the visible filtered files in the directory are affected,
consistent with how staging a directory in the files panel works.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
I always press 'd' in the patch building view, expecting that I can do
exactly what I can do in the staging view, to find out I need to go
space -> ctrl+p -> d and I think it's time to honour the muscle memory
and support this convenience keybinding.
While it's true that the behavior is a little different from the staging panel,
where the staged lines are actually removed from the view and in many cases the
selection stays more or less in the same place, it is still very useful to move
to the next stageable thing in the custom patch building view too.
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.
The tests show that this currently fails with the confusing error message "does
not match index", regardless of whether the patch conflicts with the
modifications or not. We'll improve this in the next commit.
I don't bother adding tests for reverting a patch, as the code is basically the
same as for apply.
This is functionality that works already, we only add the test for more complete
test coverage. However, there's a detail problem, and the test demonstrates
this: we keep the stash even if there was no conflict. We'll fix this next.
I almost broke this during the development of this branch, so add a test to
guard against that. The point here is that the stack remains intact, i.e. the
newly created commit is the last commit of the lower branch, and thus shows the
"*".
Previously we would render the diff for a directory to the main/secondary pair,
but a diff for a file to the staging/stagingSecondary pair. (And similar for
commit files: main/secondary for directories, but
patchBuilding/patchBuildingSecondary for files.)
I always found this confusing and couldn't really understand why we are doing
this; but now it gets in my way because I want to attach a controller to
main/secondary so that they can be focused. So change it to always use the main
context pair for everything we render from a side 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.
Assert the entire lines using Equals instead of Contains. This makes the tests a
bit easier to read, and it makes it much easier to decide how they need to be
changed when we change the layout (like we do in the last commit of this
branch).
It is true that this requires changing all these tests for any future UI
changes, but I think this is a good price to pay; those adaptions are trivial
and can be done without thinking.
There are two ways to jump to the editor on a specific line: pressing `e` in the
staging or patch building panels, or clicking on a hyperlink in a delta diff. In
both cases, this works perfectly in the unstaged changes view, but in other
views (either staged changes, or an older commit) it can often jump to the wrong
line; this happens when there are further changes to the file being viewed in
later commits or in unstaged changes.
This commit fixes this so that you end up on the right line in these cases.
When pressing `e` on line 5 in a diff of an older commit, we expect it to take
us to line 5 in that file. But we end up on line 2, because the file had further
changes both in newer commits, and in the unstaged changes of the working copy.
This updates gocui to include https://github.com/jesseduffield/gocui/pull/68 and
https://github.com/jesseduffield/gocui/pull/69, which changes views to not have
an extra blank line at the end when content ending in a newline character is
written to them. This makes text views more consistent with list views, which
don't have a blank line after the last list entry either.
Several custom patch commands on parts of an added file would fail with the
confusing error message "error: new file XXX depends on old contents". These
were dropping the custom patch from the original commit, moving the patch to a
new commit, moving it to a later commit, or moving it to the index.
We fix this by converting the patch header from an added file to a diff against
an empty file. We do this not just for the purpose of applying the patch, but
also for rendering it and copying it to the clip board. I'm not sure it matters
much in these cases, but it does feel more correct for a filtered patch to be
presented this way.
This currently works (albeit with a bit of manual work, as the user needs to
resolve conflicts), and we add this test just to make sure that we don't break
it with the following change.
This currently works, we add it as a regression test to make sure we don't break
it. It is an interesting test because it turns the deletion of the file in the
moved-from commit into a modification.
As part of this, you must now press enter on a merge conflict file
to focus the merge view; you can no longer press space and if you do
it will raise an error.
This is the highest priority of the escape actions because it's the thing you're
most likely to want to do upon hitting escape if you have a range selected.
Applying this to the staging/patch-building views is tricky: if we want this logic
for when a range of lines is selected, we'll also need to apply it when a hunk
is selected too. I still think it's worth it though: I've often accidentally
escaped from the staging view when trying to cancel a range selection.
This adds range select ability in two ways:
1) Sticky: like what we already have with the staging view i.e. press v then use arrow keys
2) Non-sticky: where you just use shift+up/down to expand the range
The state machine works like this:
(no range, press 'v') -> sticky range
(no range, press arrow) -> no range
(no range, press shift+arrow) -> nonsticky range
(sticky range, press 'v') -> no range
(sticky range, press arrow) -> sticky range
(sticky range, press shift+arrow) -> nonsticky range
(nonsticky range, press 'v') -> no range
(nonsticky range, press arrow) -> no range
(nonsticky range, press shift+arrow) -> nonsticky range
Stefan HallerandGitHub Copilot
Jesse DuffieldandClaude Opus 4.6
AzraelSec
Aaron Hoffman