mirrors/jj
1
0
Fork 1
mirror of https://github.com/martinvonz/jj.git synced 2025-01-15 16:53:25 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 7
jj/cli/tests/test_git_push.rs

1299 lines
53 KiB
Rust
Raw Normal View History

copyright: change from "Google LLC" to "The Jujutsu Authors" Let's acknowledge everyone's contributions by replacing "Google LLC" in the copyright header by "The Jujutsu Authors". If I understand correctly, it won't have any legal effect, but maybe it still helps reduce concerns from contributors (though I haven't heard any concerns). Google employees can read about Google's policy at go/releasing/contributions#copyright.
2022-11-26 23:57:50 +00:00
// Copyright 2022 The Jujutsu Authors
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
//
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
// You may obtain a copy of the License at
//
// https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
//
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
// limitations under the License.
formatting only: switch to Item level import ganularity
2024-08-22 18:18:15 +00:00
use std::path::Path;
use std::path::PathBuf;
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
use crate::common::TestEnvironment;
tests: move `testutils` from `src/` to `tests/`
2022-03-30 17:47:11 +00:00
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
fn set_up() -> (TestEnvironment, PathBuf) {
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
let test_env = TestEnvironment::default();
tests: avoid deprecated `jj init --git/--git-repo` I left the instances in `test_init_command.rs` alone since they're about testing `jj init`.
2024-05-17 19:49:25 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(test_env.env_root(), &["git", "init", "origin"]);
test_git_push: create Git repo using `jj` commands Since we don't have the `git` binary available in the test environment, it's just easier to use `jj` commands to create Git repos.
2022-11-04 18:25:11 +00:00
let origin_path = test_env.env_root().join("origin");
let origin_git_repo_path = origin_path
.join(".jj")
.join("repo")
.join("store")
.join("git");
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["describe", "-m=description 1"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["new", "root()", "-m=description 2"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark2"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["git", "export"]);
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
tests: add a convenience function for running `jj` successfully We very often expect success, and we sometimes want to get the stdout, too. Let's add a convenience function for that. It saves a lot of lines of code.
2022-03-26 21:06:48 +00:00
test_env.env_root(),
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
&[
"git",
"clone",
tests: set git_settings.auto_local_branch where it matters
2023-12-16 10:00:14 +00:00
"--config-toml=git.auto-local-branch=true",
test_git_push: create Git repo using `jj` commands Since we don't have the `git` binary available in the test environment, it's just easier to use `jj` commands to create Git repos.
2022-11-04 18:25:11 +00:00
origin_git_repo_path.to_str().unwrap(),
"local",
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
],
tests: add a convenience function for running `jj` successfully We very often expect success, and we sometimes want to get the stdout, too. Let's add a convenience function for that. It saves a lot of lines of code.
2022-03-26 21:06:48 +00:00
);
test_git_push: create Git repo using `jj` commands Since we don't have the `git` binary available in the test environment, it's just easier to use `jj` commands to create Git repos.
2022-11-04 18:25:11 +00:00
let workspace_root = test_env.env_root().join("local");
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
(test_env, workspace_root)
}
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_nothing() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
test_git_push: clarify the initial setup
2024-02-04 03:13:25 +00:00
// Show the setup. `insta` has trouble if this is done inside `set_up()`
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: clarify the initial setup
2024-02-04 03:13:25 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// No bookmarks to push yet
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
tests: re-run with `insta` crate version b9d99e87065b
2022-04-28 23:32:18 +00:00
Nothing changed.
"###);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
}
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_current_bookmark() {
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
cli: make set of immutable commits configurable This adds a new `revset-aliases.immutable_heads()s` config for defining the set of immutable commits. The set is defined as the configured revset, as well as its ancestors, and the root commit commit (even if the configured set is empty). This patch also adds enforcement of the config where we already had checks preventing rewrite of the root commit. The working-copy commit is implicitly assumed to be writable in most cases. Specifically, we won't prevent amending the working copy even if the user includes it in the config but we do prevent `jj edit @` in that case. That seems good enough to me. Maybe we should emit a warning when the working copy is in the set of immutable commits. Maybe we should add support for something more like [Mercurial's phases](https://wiki.mercurial-scm.org/Phases), which is propagated on push and pull. There's already some affordance for that in the view object's `public_heads` field. However, this is simpler, especially since we can't propagate the phase to Git remotes, and seems like a good start. Also, it lets you say that commits authored by other users are immutable, for example. For now, the functionality is in the CLI library. I'm not sure if we want to move it into the library crate. I'm leaning towards letting library users do whatever they want without being restricted by immutable commits. I do think we should move the functionality into a future `ui-lib` or `ui-util` crate. That crate would have most of the functionality in the current `cli_util` module (but in a non-CLI-specific form).
2023-09-02 02:12:01 +00:00
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "none()""#);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Update some bookmarks. `bookmark1` is not a current bookmark, but
// `bookmark2` and `my-bookmark` are.
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["describe", "bookmark1", "-m", "modified bookmark1 commit"],
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark2"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark2"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
// Check the setup
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: xtvrqkyv 0f8dc656 (empty) modified bookmark1 commit
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): xtvrqkyv hidden d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
cli templates: include change id and more in short commit description Include change id as well as (empty) and (conflict) markers in short commit description. Unlike `jj log`, * (conflict) is put in parentheses to distinguish it from the commit description when the output is not colored. * the change id is placed right before the commit id to put it into a predicteble place, even if the short commit description takes up more than one line. The commit id can be important for commit descriptions in commands like `abandon`.
2023-07-11 01:46:38 +00:00
@origin (behind by 1 commits): rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
my-bookmark: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// First dry-run. `bookmark1` should not get pushed.
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--dry-run"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move forward bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395 to bc7610b65a91
Add bookmark my-bookmark to bc7610b65a91
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move forward bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395 to bc7610b65a91
Add bookmark my-bookmark to bc7610b65a91
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: xtvrqkyv 0f8dc656 (empty) modified bookmark1 commit
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): xtvrqkyv hidden d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
my-bookmark: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: yostqsxw bc7610b6 (empty) foo
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
"###);
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
// Try pushing backwards
cli: show commit summary at end of "branch set" For the same reason as the previous commit. Created and moved stats are printed separately because it's unusual to do both within one "branch set" invocation.
2024-07-04 23:40:53 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&[
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
"bookmark",
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
"set",
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
"bookmark2",
"-rbookmark2-",
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
"--allow-backwards",
],
);
// This behavior is a strangeness of our definition of the default push revset.
// We could consider changing it.
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks found in the default push revset: remote_bookmarks(remote=origin)..@
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
Nothing changed.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// We can move a bookmark backwards
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-bbookmark2"]);
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move backward bookmark bookmark2 from bc7610b65a91 to 8476341eb395
cli `git push`: clearer user-facing messages "Move forward" instead of "Move", "Move sideways" or "Move backward" instead of (now misleading) "Force...".
2024-05-22 03:32:45 +00:00
"###);
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
}
cli: search @- for branches to push when @ has none
2022-10-20 21:18:34 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_parent_bookmark() {
cli: search @- for branches to push when @ has none
2022-10-20 21:18:34 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
cli: make set of immutable commits configurable This adds a new `revset-aliases.immutable_heads()s` config for defining the set of immutable commits. The set is defined as the configured revset, as well as its ancestors, and the root commit commit (even if the configured set is empty). This patch also adds enforcement of the config where we already had checks preventing rewrite of the root commit. The working-copy commit is implicitly assumed to be writable in most cases. Specifically, we won't prevent amending the working copy even if the user includes it in the config but we do prevent `jj edit @` in that case. That seems good enough to me. Maybe we should emit a warning when the working copy is in the set of immutable commits. Maybe we should add support for something more like [Mercurial's phases](https://wiki.mercurial-scm.org/Phases), which is propagated on push and pull. There's already some affordance for that in the view object's `public_heads` field. However, this is simpler, especially since we can't propagate the phase to Git remotes, and seems like a good start. Also, it lets you say that commits authored by other users are immutable, for example. For now, the functionality is in the CLI library. I'm not sure if we want to move it into the library crate. I'm leaning towards letting library users do whatever they want without being restricted by immutable commits. I do think we should move the functionality into a future `ui-lib` or `ui-util` crate. That crate would have most of the functionality in the current `cli_util` module (but in a non-CLI-specific form).
2023-09-02 02:12:01 +00:00
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "none()""#);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["edit", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: search @- for branches to push when @ has none
2022-10-20 21:18:34 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["describe", "-m", "modified bookmark1 commit"],
cli: search @- for branches to push when @ has none
2022-10-20 21:18:34 +00:00
);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "non-empty description"]);
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "file").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to e612d524a5c6
cli: search @- for branches to push when @ has none
2022-10-20 21:18:34 +00:00
"###);
}
git push: do not consider @- if @ has non-empty content or description
2023-03-05 20:27:03 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_no_matching_bookmark() {
git push: do not consider @- if @ has non-empty content or description
2023-03-05 20:27:03 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new"]);
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
git push: do not consider @- if @ has non-empty content or description
2023-03-05 20:27:03 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks found in the default push revset: remote_bookmarks(remote=origin)..@
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
git push: do not consider @- if @ has non-empty content or description
2023-03-05 20:27:03 +00:00
"###);
}
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_matching_bookmark_unchanged() {
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark1"]);
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks found in the default push revset: remote_bookmarks(remote=origin)..@
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
"###);
}
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
/// Test that `jj git push` without arguments pushes a bookmark to the specified
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
/// remote even if it's already up to date on another remote
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
/// (`remote_bookmarks(remote=<remote>)..@` vs. `remote_bookmarks()..@`).
cli: report no updates to current branch Fix a bug where `jj git push` would print "No current branch." when there is a current branch but it is unchanged. We were conflating the two because we print the message when no updates were performed, instead of only when no branches were found.
2023-01-30 03:46:29 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_other_remote_has_bookmark() {
cli: report no updates to current branch Fix a bug where `jj git push` would print "No current branch." when there is a current branch but it is unchanged. We were conflating the two because we print the message when no updates were performed, instead of only when no branches were found.
2023-01-30 03:46:29 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
cli: make set of immutable commits configurable This adds a new `revset-aliases.immutable_heads()s` config for defining the set of immutable commits. The set is defined as the configured revset, as well as its ancestors, and the root commit commit (even if the configured set is empty). This patch also adds enforcement of the config where we already had checks preventing rewrite of the root commit. The working-copy commit is implicitly assumed to be writable in most cases. Specifically, we won't prevent amending the working copy even if the user includes it in the config but we do prevent `jj edit @` in that case. That seems good enough to me. Maybe we should emit a warning when the working copy is in the set of immutable commits. Maybe we should add support for something more like [Mercurial's phases](https://wiki.mercurial-scm.org/Phases), which is propagated on push and pull. There's already some affordance for that in the view object's `public_heads` field. However, this is simpler, especially since we can't propagate the phase to Git remotes, and seems like a good start. Also, it lets you say that commits authored by other users are immutable, for example. For now, the functionality is in the CLI library. I'm not sure if we want to move it into the library crate. I'm leaning towards letting library users do whatever they want without being restricted by immutable commits. I do think we should move the functionality into a future `ui-lib` or `ui-util` crate. That crate would have most of the functionality in the current `cli_util` module (but in a non-CLI-specific form).
2023-09-02 02:12:01 +00:00
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "none()""#);
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
// Create another remote (but actually the same)
let other_remote_path = test_env
.env_root()
.join("origin")
.join(".jj")
.join("repo")
.join("store")
.join("git");
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&[
"git",
"remote",
"add",
"other",
other_remote_path.to_str().unwrap(),
],
);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Modify bookmark1 and push it to `origin`
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["edit", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m=modified"]);
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to a657f1b61b94
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
"###);
// Since it's already pushed to origin, nothing will happen if push again
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks found in the default push revset: remote_bookmarks(remote=origin)..@
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// The bookmark was moved on the "other" remote as well (since it's actually the
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
// same remote), but `jj` is not aware of that since it thinks this is a
// different remote. So, the push should fail.
//
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// But it succeeds! That's because the bookmark is created at the same location
// as it is on the remote. This would also work for a descendant.
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
//
// TODO: Saner test?
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--remote=other"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to other:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark1 to a657f1b61b94
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
"###);
cli: report no updates to current branch Fix a bug where `jj git push` would print "No current branch." when there is a current branch but it is unchanged. We were conflating the two because we print the message when no updates were performed, instead of only when no branches were found.
2023-01-30 03:46:29 +00:00
}
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
#[test]
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
fn test_git_push_forward_unexpectedly_moved() {
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 forward on the remote
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
let origin_path = test_env.env_root().join("origin");
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["new", "bookmark1", "-m=remote"]);
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
std::fs::write(origin_path.join("remote"), "remote").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["git", "export"]);
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 forward to another commit locally
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark1", "-m=local"]);
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("local"), "local").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
// Pushing should fail
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move forward bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to 6750425ff51c
Error: Refusing to push a bookmark that unexpectedly moved on the remote. Affected refs: refs/heads/bookmark1
Hint: Try fetching from the remote, then make the bookmark point to where you want it to be, and push again.
cli: include hint when push is not fast-forward
2023-08-13 22:41:53 +00:00
"###);
}
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_sideways_unexpectedly_moved() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 forward on the remote
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
let origin_path = test_env.env_root().join("origin");
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["new", "bookmark1", "-m=remote"]);
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
std::fs::write(origin_path.join("remote"), "remote").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &origin_path), @r###"
bookmark1: vruxwmqv 80284bec remote
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@git (behind by 1 commits): qpvuntsm d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
@git: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["git", "export"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 sideways to another commit locally
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-m=local"]);
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("local"), "local").unwrap();
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1", "--allow-backwards"],
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: kmkuslsw 0f8bf988 local
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to 0f8bf988588e
Error: Refusing to push a bookmark that unexpectedly moved on the remote. Affected refs: refs/heads/bookmark1
Hint: Try fetching from the remote, then make the bookmark point to where you want it to be, and push again.
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
"###);
}
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// This tests whether the push checks that the remote bookmarks are in expected
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
// positions.
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_deletion_unexpectedly_moved() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 forward on the remote
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
let origin_path = test_env.env_root().join("origin");
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["new", "bookmark1", "-m=remote"]);
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
std::fs::write(origin_path.join("remote"), "remote").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &origin_path), @r###"
bookmark1: vruxwmqv 80284bec remote
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@git (behind by 1 commits): qpvuntsm d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
@git: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["git", "export"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Delete bookmark1 locally
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1 (deleted)
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let stderr =
test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--bookmark", "bookmark1"]);
jj git push: safety checks in push negotiation, "force-with-lease" As explained in the commit, our logic is a bit more complicated than that of `git push --force-with-lease`. This is to match the behavior of `jj git fetch` and branch conflict resolution rules.
2024-05-09 02:31:19 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Error: Refusing to push a bookmark that unexpectedly moved on the remote. Affected refs: refs/heads/bookmark1
Hint: Try fetching from the remote, then make the bookmark point to where you want it to be, and push again.
test_git_push: demo behavior we'd like to be safer Adds two tests where pushing should fail, but currently succeeds.
2024-04-08 21:53:56 +00:00
"###);
}
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_unexpectedly_deleted() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Delete bookmark1 forward on the remote
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
let origin_path = test_env.env_root().join("origin");
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &origin_path), @r###"
bookmark1 (deleted)
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@git: qpvuntsm d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
@git: zsuskuln 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&origin_path, &["git", "export"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Move bookmark1 sideways to another commit locally
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-m=local"]);
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("local"), "local").unwrap();
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1", "--allow-backwards"],
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: kpqxywon 1ebe27ba local
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Pushing a moved bookmark fails if deleted on remote
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to 1ebe27ba04bf
Error: Refusing to push a bookmark that unexpectedly moved on the remote. Affected refs: refs/heads/bookmark1
Hint: Try fetching from the remote, then make the bookmark point to where you want it to be, and push again.
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1 (deleted)
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Pushing a *deleted* bookmark succeeds if deleted on remote, even if we expect
// bookmark1@origin to exist and point somewhere.
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-bbookmark1"]);
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
test_git_push: test unexpectedly deleted branch
2024-04-20 05:44:39 +00:00
"###);
}
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_creation_unexpectedly_already_exists() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Forget bookmark1 locally
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "forget", "bookmark1"]);
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
// Create a new branh1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-m=new bookmark1"]);
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("local"), "local").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark1"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: yostqsxw cb17dcdc new bookmark1
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
"###);
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark1 to cb17dcdc74d5
Error: Refusing to push a bookmark that unexpectedly moved on the remote. Affected refs: refs/heads/bookmark1
Hint: Try fetching from the remote, then make the bookmark point to where you want it to be, and push again.
test_git_push: add a test for creating unexpectedly existing branch This tests `git push` attempting to create a branch when the branch already unexpectedly exists on the remote. This should (and does) fail. Also changes another test to use `jj_cmd_failure`.
2024-04-17 00:21:05 +00:00
"###);
}
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_locally_created_and_rewritten() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Ensure that remote bookmarks aren't tracked automatically
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
test_env.add_config("git.auto-local-branch = false");
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Push locally-created bookmark
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-mlocal 1"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my"]);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark my to fcc999921ce9
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Rewrite it and push again, which would fail if the pushed bookmark weren't
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
// set to "tracking"
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-mlocal 2"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
cli: add "branch list --all" option to include all remote branches This will be the option to include non-tracking remote branches. We could add more fine-grained filtering flags, but I think --all is good enough and easier to remember. This patch also updates many of the test outputs to include synchronized remote branches. I think verbose outputs will help catch future bugs.
2023-10-18 06:12:17 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
my: vruxwmqv bde1d2e4 (empty) local 2
cli templates: include hidden (AKA abandoned) status in short commit template This is mainly relevant for `jj abandon` and `jj branch list`. #2411
2023-10-24 01:43:12 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): vruxwmqv hidden fcc99992 (empty) local 1
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark my from fcc999921ce9 to bde1d2e44b2a
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
}
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
#[test]
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
fn test_git_push_multiple() {
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["bookmark", "set", "--allow-backwards", "bookmark2"],
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
// Check the setup
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1 (deleted)
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
cli templates: include change id and more in short commit description Include change id as well as (empty) and (conflict) markers in short commit description. Unlike `jj log`, * (conflict) is put in parentheses to distinguish it from the commit description when the output is not colored. * the change id is placed right before the commit id to put it into a predicteble place, even if the short commit description takes up more than one line. The commit id can be important for commit descriptions in commands like `abandon`.
2023-07-11 01:46:38 +00:00
@origin (ahead by 1 commits, behind by 1 commits): rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
my-bookmark: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
"###);
cli: add a `--dry-run` for `jj git push`
2022-06-29 02:10:45 +00:00
// First dry-run
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) =
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all", "--dry-run"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Move sideways bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395 to c4a3c3105d92
Add bookmark my-bookmark to c4a3c3105d92
cli: add a `--dry-run` for `jj git push`
2022-06-29 02:10:45 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Dry run requesting two specific bookmarks
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "-b=bookmark1", "-b=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Add bookmark my-bookmark to c4a3c3105d92
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Dry run requesting two specific bookmarks twice
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
jj git push: Make sure each branch is processed at most once
2022-12-19 02:25:04 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&[
"git",
"push",
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
"-b=bookmark1",
"-b=my-bookmark",
"-b=bookmark1",
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
"-b=glob:my-*",
jj git push: Make sure each branch is processed at most once
2022-12-19 02:25:04 +00:00
"--dry-run",
],
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Add bookmark my-bookmark to c4a3c3105d92
jj git push: Make sure each branch is processed at most once
2022-12-19 02:25:04 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
// Dry run with glob pattern
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "-b=glob:bookmark?", "--dry-run"],
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Move sideways bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395 to c4a3c3105d92
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Unmatched bookmark name is error
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-b=foo"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Error: No such bookmark: foo
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
"###);
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "-b=foo", "-b=glob:?bookmark"],
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Error: No matching bookmarks for patterns: foo, ?bookmark
cli: add string pattern support to "git push --branch" Since "jj git fetch --branch" supports glob patterns, users would expect that "jj git push --branch glob:.." also works. The error handling bits are copied from "branch" sub commands. We might want to extract it to a common helper function, but I haven't figured out a reasonable boundary point yet.
2023-10-24 06:31:26 +00:00
"###);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
Move sideways bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395 to c4a3c3105d92
Add bookmark my-bookmark to c4a3c3105d92
cli: make `jj git push` print what it's going to push It's convenient to push all changed branches every time with `jj git push`, but sometimes I want to know which branches were actually pushed. This make the command print what it's going to do. I'll add a `--dry-run` mode and tests next.
2022-06-29 02:10:45 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark2: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
my-bookmark: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: yqosqzyt c4a3c310 (empty) foo
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
"###);
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
let stdout = test_env.jj_cmd_success(&workspace_root, &["log", "-rall()"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
@ yqosqzyt test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:17 bookmark2 my-bookmark c4a3c310
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
│ (empty) foo
Enable the new graph nodes by default. It's been tested in various places now, so this is probably mature enough to be the default.
2024-07-15 22:20:10 +00:00
│ ○ rlzusymt test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:10 8476341e
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
├─╯ (empty) description 2
Enable the new graph nodes by default. It's been tested in various places now, so this is probably mature enough to be the default.
2024-07-15 22:20:10 +00:00
│ ○ xtvrqkyv test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:08 d13ecdbd
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
├─╯ (empty) description 1
Enable the new graph nodes by default. It's been tested in various places now, so this is probably mature enough to be the default.
2024-07-15 22:20:10 +00:00
◆ zzzzzzzz root() 00000000
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
"###);
tests: add test for successful push I think I had not added tests for successful push before because I thought there was some issue with testing it with libgit2. There *is* an issue, which is that libgit2 requires the remote to be bare when it's on local disk, but we can very easily make the git repo bare in this test. I also updated the error handling in the `git` module to not let follow-on errors hide the real error and to not fail if two branches moved to the same commit.
2022-07-02 02:50:51 +00:00
}
Add a test for `git push --change`
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_changes() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
Add a test for `git push --change`
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "bar"]);
Add a test for `git push --change`
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--change", "@"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Creating bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt for revision yostqsxwqrlt
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt to cf1a53a8800a
Add a test for `git push --change`
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
"###);
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
// test pushing two changes at once
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified2").unwrap();
cli: let `jj git push --change` handle large revsets In a repo of mine I wanted to do something like the following to push all of my leaves to the remote as backup: jj git push -c 'all:heads(base::) & mine() ~ empty()' But couldn't, because `jj git push` doesn't handle large revsets, even though it does handle multiple `-c` arguments, so I had to work out some pipe-to-xargs command instead. Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
2024-06-19 18:09:00 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-c=(@|@-)"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Error: Revset "(@|@-)" resolved to more than one revision
Hint: The revset "(@|@-)" resolved to these revisions:
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
yostqsxw 16c16966 push-yostqsxwqrlt* | bar
yqosqzyt a050abf4 foo
cli: let `jj git push --change` handle large revsets In a repo of mine I wanted to do something like the following to push all of my leaves to the remote as backup: jj git push -c 'all:heads(base::) & mine() ~ empty()' But couldn't, because `jj git push` doesn't handle large revsets, even though it does handle multiple `-c` arguments, so I had to work out some pipe-to-xargs command instead. Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
2024-06-19 18:09:00 +00:00
Hint: Prefix the expression with 'all:' to allow any number of revisions (i.e. 'all:(@|@-)').
"###);
// test pushing two changes at once, part 2
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-c=all:(@|@-)"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Creating bookmark push-yqosqzytrlsw for revision yqosqzytrlsw
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt from cf1a53a8800a to 16c169664e9f
Add bookmark push-yqosqzytrlsw to a050abf4ff07
Allow `jj git push` to push multiple branches/changes at once Also creates short arg `-b` for `--branch`.
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
"###);
jj git push: Make sure each branch is processed at most once
2022-12-19 02:25:04 +00:00
// specifying the same change twice doesn't break things
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified3").unwrap();
cli: let `jj git push --change` handle large revsets In a repo of mine I wanted to do something like the following to push all of my leaves to the remote as backup: jj git push -c 'all:heads(base::) & mine() ~ empty()' But couldn't, because `jj git push` doesn't handle large revsets, even though it does handle multiple `-c` arguments, so I had to work out some pipe-to-xargs command instead. Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
2024-06-19 18:09:00 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-c=all:(@|@)"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt from 16c169664e9f to ef6313d50ac1
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
"###);
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// specifying the same bookmark with --change/--bookmark doesn't break things
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified4").unwrap();
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "-c=@", "-b=push-yostqsxwqrlt"],
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt from ef6313d50ac1 to c1e65d3a64ce
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// try again with --change that moves the bookmark forward
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified5").unwrap();
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&[
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
"bookmark",
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
"set",
"-r=@-",
"--allow-backwards",
"push-yostqsxwqrlt",
],
);
let stdout = test_env.jj_cmd_success(&workspace_root, &["status"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @r###"
Working copy changes:
M file
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
Working copy : yostqsxw 38cb417c bar
Parent commit: yqosqzyt a050abf4 push-yostqsxwqrlt* push-yqosqzytrlsw | foo
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
"###);
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "-c=@", "-b=push-yostqsxwqrlt"],
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move sideways bookmark push-yostqsxwqrlt from c1e65d3a64ce to 38cb417ce3a6
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
"###);
let stdout = test_env.jj_cmd_success(&workspace_root, &["status"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @r###"
Working copy changes:
M file
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
Working copy : yostqsxw 38cb417c push-yostqsxwqrlt | bar
Parent commit: yqosqzyt a050abf4 push-yqosqzytrlsw | foo
tests: run "git push" with both --change and --branch arguments It's unclear whether --change should precede or not, but it's wrong to try to push the same branch twice.
2024-03-17 07:09:06 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Test changing `git.push-bookmark-prefix`. It causes us to push again.
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
test_git_push: Test `git.push-branch-prefix` config
2023-08-07 22:41:42 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&[
"git",
"push",
"--config-toml",
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
r"git.push-bookmark-prefix='test-'",
test_git_push: Test `git.push-branch-prefix` config
2023-08-07 22:41:42 +00:00
"--change=@",
],
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Creating bookmark test-yostqsxwqrlt for revision yostqsxwqrlt
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark test-yostqsxwqrlt to 38cb417ce3a6
test_git_push: Test `git.push-branch-prefix` config
2023-08-07 22:41:42 +00:00
"###);
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
}
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_revisions() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "bar"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-1"]);
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "baz"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-2a"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-2b"]);
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified again").unwrap();
// Push an empty set
git-push: do not error out on empty revision set "-r REVISIONS" here specifies the search space of the branches to push, and warned if no branches are found in that space. I don't think an empty set should be an error, but a warning for consistency. The warning message will be improved by the subsequent patches.
2024-03-17 05:14:06 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-r=none()"]);
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks point to the specified revisions: none()
git-push: do not error out on empty revision set "-r REVISIONS" here specifies the search space of the branches to push, and warned if no branches are found in that space. I don't think an empty set should be an error, but a warning for consistency. The warning message will be improved by the subsequent patches.
2024-03-17 05:14:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Push a revision with no bookmarks
cli: make `jj git push -r` just warn if no branches targeted If there are branches in the revset that don't need to be pushed because they already match the destination, we currently just print `Nothing changed.` It seems consistent with that to also treat it as success if there are no branches in the specified set to start with. This patch makes the command print a warning in that case instead.
2023-08-22 05:34:58 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-r=@--"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks point to the specified revisions: @--
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Push a revision with a single bookmark
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) =
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-r=@-", "--dry-run"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark-1 to 5f432a855e59
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Push multiple revisions of which some have bookmarks
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "-r=@--", "-r=@-", "--dry-run"],
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: No bookmarks point to the specified revisions: @--
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark-1 to 5f432a855e59
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Push a revision with a multiple bookmarks
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) =
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-r=@", "--dry-run"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark-2a to 84f499037f5c
Add bookmark bookmark-2b to 84f499037f5c
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Repeating a commit doesn't result in repeated messages about the bookmark
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "-r=@-", "-r=@-", "--dry-run"],
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark-1 to 5f432a855e59
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
}
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_mixed() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "bar"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-1"]);
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "baz"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-2a"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark-2b"]);
cli: add `jj git push -r` for pushing branches pointing to revset I think I will find this useful in at least two cases: 1. When you already have a branch pointing to some commit, it's easier to do `jj git push -r xyz` than `jj git push --branch push-xyzxyzyxzxyz`. 2. When you have a stack of changes, it's useful to be able to push all of them at once. I think we should also update the default behavior of `jj git push` to be `jj git push -r 'remote_branches()..@'` or something like that. That removes the ugliness of having a default behavior that the user can't reproduce using flags. I'll leave that change for a separate PR.
2023-06-03 05:39:33 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified again").unwrap();
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&[
"git",
"push",
"--change=@--",
"--bookmark=bookmark-1",
"-r=@",
],
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Creating bookmark push-yqosqzytrlsw for revision yqosqzytrlsw
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark push-yqosqzytrlsw to a050abf4ff07
Add bookmark bookmark-1 to 5f432a855e59
Add bookmark bookmark-2a to 84f499037f5c
Add bookmark bookmark-2b to 84f499037f5c
cli: allow `jj git push --change xyz --branch foo` This was pretty simple. I simplified a bit by making the transaction description mention only branches, not changes. It still mentions the branches created for the changes, however. Also, since the operation "tags" contain the full command line, I think it'll still be relatively easy for the user to understand what the operation was about.
2023-06-03 06:24:28 +00:00
"###);
}
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_existing_long_bookmark() {
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&[
"bookmark",
"create",
"push-19b790168e73f7a73a98deae21e807c0",
],
Shorten the git push branch when possible using the short change ID hash.
2023-01-11 18:30:31 +00:00
);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--change=@"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark push-19b790168e73f7a73a98deae21e807c0 to a050abf4ff07
jj git push: Make sure each branch is processed at most once
2022-12-19 02:25:04 +00:00
"###);
Add a test for `git push --change`
2022-12-17 22:31:12 +00:00
}
cli: don't use stale index to look up snapshotted working copy
2022-07-05 06:14:39 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_unsnapshotted_change() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "foo"]);
cli: don't use stale index to look up snapshotted working copy
2022-07-05 06:14:39 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--change", "@"]);
cli: don't use stale index to look up snapshotted working copy
2022-07-05 06:14:39 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "modified").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--change", "@"]);
cli: don't use stale index to look up snapshotted working copy
2022-07-05 06:14:39 +00:00
}
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_conflict() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "first").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["commit", "-m", "first"]);
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "second").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["commit", "-m", "second"]);
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "third").unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["rebase", "-r", "@", "-d", "@--"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m", "third"]);
cli: push only branches pointing to `@` by default Since we now allow pushing open commits, we can implement support for pushing the "current" branch by defining a "current" branch as any branch pointing to `@`. That definition of a current/active seems to have been the consensus in discussion #411. Closes #246.
2022-07-13 04:14:02 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all"]);
tests: re-run with `insta` crate version b9d99e87065b
2022-04-28 23:32:18 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 73c265a92cfd since it has conflicts
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
}
#[test]
fn test_git_push_no_description() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m="]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "--bookmark", "my-bookmark"],
);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
test_git_push: create Git repo using `jj` commands Since we don't have the `git` binary available in the test environment, it's just easier to use `jj` commands to create Git repos.
2022-11-04 18:25:11 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 5b36783cd11c since it has no description
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
cli: add --allow-empty-description flag to push This commit adds an optional flag to be able to push commits with an empty description to a remote git repo. While the default behavior is ideal we might need to interact with a repo that has an empty commit description in it. I ran into this issue a few weeks ago pushing commits from an open source repo to an empty repo and had to go back to using git for that push as I would not want to rewrite the history which was many many years long just for that. This flag allows users an escape hatch for pushing empty descriptions for commits and they're sure that they want that behavior. This commit adds the flag to the `git push` command and updates the docs for the command. It also updates the original test to make sure that the flag works as intended to reject the commit when not set and to allow the commit when the flag is set. Closes #2633
2024-05-09 17:26:07 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&[
"git",
"push",
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
"--bookmark",
"my-bookmark",
cli: add --allow-empty-description flag to push This commit adds an optional flag to be able to push commits with an empty description to a remote git repo. While the default behavior is ideal we might need to interact with a repo that has an empty commit description in it. I ran into this issue a few weeks ago pushing commits from an open source repo to an empty repo and had to go back to using git for that push as I would not want to rewrite the history which was many many years long just for that. This flag allows users an escape hatch for pushing empty descriptions for commits and they're sure that they want that behavior. This commit adds the flag to the `git push` command and updates the docs for the command. It also updates the original test to make sure that the flag works as intended to reject the commit when not set and to allow the commit when the flag is set. Closes #2633
2024-05-09 17:26:07 +00:00
"--allow-empty-description",
],
);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
}
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_no_description_in_immutable() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "imm"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["describe", "-m="]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "foo"]);
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Error: Won't push commit 5b36783cd11c since it has no description
"###);
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "imm""#);
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark my-bookmark to ea7373507ad9
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
}
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_missing_author() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
let run_without_var = |var: &str, args: &[&str]| {
test_env
.jj_cmd(&workspace_root, args)
.env_remove(var)
.assert()
.success();
};
revset: convert root symbol to function The idea is that we can fully eliminate special symbols that would otherwise shadow user branches, tags, or change ID prefixes. Closes #2095
2023-09-03 03:47:23 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_USER", &["checkout", "root()", "-m=initial"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_USER", &["bookmark", "create", "missing-name"]);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark", "missing-name"],
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commits: use empty strings instead of placeholders for missing name or email This commit replaces the functions `UserSettings::user_name_placeholder()`` and `UserSettings::user_email_placeholder()` with `const` `&str`s to emphasize that the placeholder strings must not be changed to support commits without names or email addresses made before this change.
2023-08-16 21:10:54 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 944313939bbd since it has no author and/or committer set
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
revset: convert root symbol to function The idea is that we can fully eliminate special symbols that would otherwise shadow user branches, tags, or change ID prefixes. Closes #2095
2023-09-03 03:47:23 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["checkout", "root()", "-m=initial"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["bookmark", "create", "missing-email"]);
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=missing-email"],
);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commits: use empty strings instead of placeholders for missing name or email This commit replaces the functions `UserSettings::user_name_placeholder()`` and `UserSettings::user_email_placeholder()` with `const` `&str`s to emphasize that the placeholder strings must not be changed to support commits without names or email addresses made before this change.
2023-08-16 21:10:54 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 59354714f789 since it has no author and/or committer set
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
}
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_missing_author_in_immutable() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
let run_without_var = |var: &str, args: &[&str]| {
test_env
.jj_cmd(&workspace_root, args)
.env_remove(var)
.assert()
.success();
};
run_without_var("JJ_USER", &["new", "root()", "-m=no author name"]);
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["new", "-m=no author email"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "imm"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "foo"]);
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Error: Won't push commit 011f740bf8b5 since it has no author and/or committer set
"###);
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "imm""#);
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark my-bookmark to 68fdae89de4f
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
}
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_missing_committer() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
let run_without_var = |var: &str, args: &[&str]| {
test_env
.jj_cmd(&workspace_root, args)
.env_remove(var)
.assert()
.success();
};
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "missing-name"]);
tests: avoid about-to-be-deleted `close` command
2022-11-05 00:15:35 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_USER", &["describe", "-m=no committer name"]);
let stderr =
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--bookmark=missing-name"]);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commits: use empty strings instead of placeholders for missing name or email This commit replaces the functions `UserSettings::user_name_placeholder()`` and `UserSettings::user_email_placeholder()` with `const` `&str`s to emphasize that the placeholder strings must not be changed to support commits without names or email addresses made before this change.
2023-08-16 21:10:54 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 4fd190283d1a since it has no author and/or committer set
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["checkout", "root()"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "missing-email"]);
tests: avoid about-to-be-deleted `close` command
2022-11-05 00:15:35 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["describe", "-m=no committer email"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=missing-email"],
);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commits: use empty strings instead of placeholders for missing name or email This commit replaces the functions `UserSettings::user_name_placeholder()`` and `UserSettings::user_email_placeholder()` with `const` `&str`s to emphasize that the placeholder strings must not be changed to support commits without names or email addresses made before this change.
2023-08-16 21:10:54 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit eab97428a6ec since it has no author and/or committer set
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
"###);
// Test message when there are multiple reasons (missing committer and
// description)
tests: avoid about-to-be-deleted `close` command
2022-11-05 00:15:35 +00:00
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["describe", "-m=", "missing-email"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=missing-email"],
);
cli: prevent pushing commits without description, author, or committer This patch prevents perhaps pushing commits with an empty description or the placeholder "(no user/email configured)" values for author/committer. Closes #322.
2022-05-27 15:54:47 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
commits: use empty strings instead of placeholders for missing name or email This commit replaces the functions `UserSettings::user_name_placeholder()`` and `UserSettings::user_email_placeholder()` with `const` `&str`s to emphasize that the placeholder strings must not be changed to support commits without names or email addresses made before this change.
2023-08-16 21:10:54 +00:00
Error: Won't push commit 1143ed607f54 since it has no description and it has no author and/or committer set
tests: re-run with `insta` crate version b9d99e87065b
2022-04-28 23:32:18 +00:00
"###);
cli: prevent pushing commits with conflicts It rarely makes sense to push commits with conflicts to a remote Git repo (which is the only kind of remote we support so far), so let's just error out instead of pushing a commit that others pulling from the remote probably can't make sense of. I've only added a simple test for the error case for now. `libgit2` doesn't support pushing to a local repo, so it's harder to test the success case. I suppose we'll have to have the regular `git` binary running local servers in test eventually. Closes #60.
2022-03-09 23:57:12 +00:00
}
git push: add --deleted option
2023-02-19 12:08:24 +00:00
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_missing_committer_in_immutable() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
let run_without_var = |var: &str, args: &[&str]| {
test_env
.jj_cmd(&workspace_root, args)
.env_remove(var)
.assert()
.success();
};
run_without_var("JJ_USER", &["describe", "-m=no committer name"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new"]);
run_without_var("JJ_EMAIL", &["describe", "-m=no committer email"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "imm"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "-m", "foo"]);
std::fs::write(workspace_root.join("file"), "contents").unwrap();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "my-bookmark"]);
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Error: Won't push commit 7e61dc727a8f since it has no author and/or committer set
"###);
test_env.add_config(r#"revset-aliases."immutable_heads()" = "imm""#);
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["git", "push", "--bookmark=my-bookmark", "--dry-run"],
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark my-bookmark to c79f85e90b4a
cli: Ignore `immutable()` in `jj git push` conflict/desc/user checks Fixes #3029.
2024-06-21 01:50:51 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
}
git push: add --deleted option
2023-02-19 12:08:24 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_deleted() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--deleted"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
"###);
let stdout = test_env.jj_cmd_success(&workspace_root, &["log", "-rall()"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
○ rlzusymt test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:10 bookmark2 8476341e
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
│ (empty) description 2
Enable the new graph nodes by default. It's been tested in various places now, so this is probably mature enough to be the default.
2024-07-15 22:20:10 +00:00
│ ○ xtvrqkyv test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:08 d13ecdbd
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
├─╯ (empty) description 1
cli: show timestamp in local timezone and without millis and offset As discussed in #2900, the milliseconds are rarely useful, and it can be confusing with different timezones because it makes harder to compare timestamps. I added an environment variable to control the timestamp in a cross-platform way. I didn't document because it exists only for tests (like `JJ_RANDOMNESS_SEED`). Closes #2900
2024-02-12 07:26:19 +00:00
│ @ yqosqzyt test.user@example.com 2001-02-03 08:05:13 5b36783c
git: on push, update jj's view of remote branches without using import_refs() This means that the commits previously pinned by remote branches are no longer abandoned. I think that's more correct since "push" is the operation to propagate local view to remote, and uninteresting commits should have been locally abandoned.
2023-10-14 19:27:44 +00:00
├─╯ (empty) (no description set)
Enable the new graph nodes by default. It's been tested in various places now, so this is probably mature enough to be the default.
2024-07-15 22:20:10 +00:00
◆ zzzzzzzz root() 00000000
git push: add --deleted option
2023-02-19 12:08:24 +00:00
"###);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--deleted"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
git push: add --deleted option
2023-02-19 12:08:24 +00:00
Nothing changed.
"###);
}
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
#[test]
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn test_git_push_conflicting_bookmarks() {
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
tests: set git_settings.auto_local_branch where it matters
2023-12-16 10:00:14 +00:00
test_env.add_config("git.auto-local-branch = true");
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
let git_repo = {
let mut git_repo_path = workspace_root.clone();
git_repo_path.extend([".jj", "repo", "store", "git"]);
git2::Repository::open(&git_repo_path).unwrap()
};
// Forget remote ref, move local ref, then fetch to create conflict.
git_repo
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
.find_reference("refs/remotes/origin/bookmark2")
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
.unwrap()
.delete()
.unwrap();
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "import"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-m=description 3"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark2"]);
tests: replace jj_cmd_success() involving mutation to allow stderr output
2023-10-10 11:59:18 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "fetch"]);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
commit_builder: reset author timestamp on discardable commits It's common to create empty working-copy commits while using jj, and currently the author timestamp for a commit is only set when it is first created. If you create an empty commit, then don't work on a repo for a few days, and then start working on a new feature without abandoning the working-copy commit, the author timestamp will remain as the time the commit was created rather than being updated to the time that work began or finished. This commit changes the behavior so that discardable commits (empty commits with no description) by the current user have their author timestamps reset when they are rewritten, meaning that the author timestamp will become finalized whenever a commit is given a description or becomes non-empty.
2024-06-23 22:20:33 +00:00
@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark2 (conflicted):
cli templates: include change id and more in short commit description Include change id as well as (empty) and (conflict) markers in short commit description. Unlike `jj log`, * (conflict) is put in parentheses to distinguish it from the commit description when the output is not colored. * the change id is placed right before the commit id to put it into a predicteble place, even if the short commit description takes up more than one line. The commit id can be important for commit descriptions in commands like `abandon`.
2023-07-11 01:46:38 +00:00
+ yostqsxw 8e670e2d (empty) description 3
+ rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
@origin (behind by 1 commits): rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let bump_bookmark1 = || {
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark1", "-m=bump"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
};
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Conflicting bookmark at @
cli: make `jj git push` default to `-r 'remote_branches()..@'` The way `jj git push` without arguments chooses branches pointing to either `@` or `@-` is unusual and difficult to explain. Now that we have `-r`, we could instead default it to `-r '@-::@'`. However, I think it seems likely that users will want to push all local branches leading up to `@` from the closest remote branch. That's typically what I want. This patch changes the default to do that.
2023-08-21 20:11:40 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Warning: Bookmark bookmark2 is conflicted
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Hint: Run `jj bookmark list` to inspect, and use `jj bookmark set` to fix it up.
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
Nothing changed.
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// --bookmark should be blocked by conflicting bookmark
let stderr =
test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--bookmark", "bookmark2"]);
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Error: Bookmark bookmark2 is conflicted
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Hint: Run `jj bookmark list` to inspect, and use `jj bookmark set` to fix it up.
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// --all shouldn't be blocked by conflicting bookmark
bump_bookmark1();
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Warning: Bookmark bookmark2 is conflicted
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Hint: Run `jj bookmark list` to inspect, and use `jj bookmark set` to fix it up.
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move forward bookmark bookmark1 from d13ecdbda2a2 to 8df52121b022
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
"###);
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// --revisions shouldn't be blocked by conflicting bookmark
bump_bookmark1();
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
let (stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "-rall()"]);
cli: send status messages to stderr, specify stdout/stderr explicitly Many of &mut UI can be changed to immutable borrows, but I'm not gonna update them in this patch.
2023-10-10 11:07:06 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stdout, @"");
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Warning: Bookmark bookmark2 is conflicted
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Hint: Run `jj bookmark list` to inspect, and use `jj bookmark set` to fix it up.
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Move forward bookmark bookmark1 from 8df52121b022 to 345e1f64a64d
cli: warn if loosely selected push targets include conflicted branches
2023-07-03 08:52:31 +00:00
"###);
tests: add "git push" tests involving conflicting branches
2023-07-03 09:03:07 +00:00
}
git: prohibit push to remote named "git" Since I'm going to make git::push_branches() update the repo view internally, it should fail fast if the remote name is reserved. Before, the problem was detected on git::import_refs().
2023-10-14 20:11:19 +00:00
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_deleted_untracked() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Absent local bookmark shouldn't be considered "deleted" compared to
// non-tracking remote bookmark.
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["bookmark", "untrack", "bookmark1@origin"],
);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--deleted"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Nothing changed.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
let stderr = test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--bookmark=bookmark1"]);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Error: No such bookmark: bookmark1
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
}
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_tracked_vs_all() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark1", "-mmoved bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark2", "-mmoved bookmark2"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "delete", "bookmark2"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["bookmark", "untrack", "bookmark1@origin"],
);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "create", "bookmark3"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: vruxwmqv db059e3f (empty) moved bookmark1
bookmark1@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
bookmark2 (deleted)
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
bookmark3: znkkpsqq 1aa4f1f2 (empty) moved bookmark2
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// At this point, only bookmark2 is still tracked. `jj git push --tracked` would
// try to push it and no other bookmarks.
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) =
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--tracked", "--dry-run"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Delete bookmark bookmark2 from 8476341eb395
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
Dry-run requested, not pushing.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Untrack the last remaining tracked bookmark.
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["bookmark", "untrack", "bookmark2@origin"],
);
insta::assert_snapshot!(get_bookmark_output(&test_env, &workspace_root), @r###"
bookmark1: vruxwmqv db059e3f (empty) moved bookmark1
bookmark1@origin: xtvrqkyv d13ecdbd (empty) description 1
bookmark2@origin: rlzusymt 8476341e (empty) description 2
bookmark3: znkkpsqq 1aa4f1f2 (empty) moved bookmark2
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// Now, no bookmarks are tracked. --tracked does not push anything
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--tracked"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
Nothing changed.
"###);
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// All bookmarks are still untracked.
// - --all tries to push bookmark1, but fails because a bookmark with the same
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
// name exist on the remote.
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// - --all succeeds in pushing bookmark3, since there is no bookmark of the same
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
// name on the remote.
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// - It does not try to push bookmark2.
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
//
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// TODO: Not trying to push bookmark2 could be considered correct, or perhaps
// we want to consider this as a deletion of the bookmark that failed because
// the bookmark was untracked. In the latter case, an error message should be
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
// printed. Some considerations:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
// - Whatever we do should be consistent with what `jj bookmark list` does; it
// currently does *not* list bookmarks like bookmark2 as "about to be
// deleted", as can be seen above.
// - We could consider showing some hint on `jj bookmark untrack
// bookmark2@origin` instead of showing an error here.
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: Non-tracking remote bookmark bookmark1@origin exists
Hint: Run `jj bookmark track bookmark1@origin` to import the remote bookmark.
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to origin:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark3 to 1aa4f1f2ef7f
cli `git push`: new --tracked option
2024-02-03 03:38:54 +00:00
"###);
}
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
#[test]
fn test_git_push_moved_forward_untracked() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "bookmark1", "-mmoved bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["bookmark", "set", "bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["bookmark", "untrack", "bookmark1@origin"],
);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: Non-tracking remote bookmark bookmark1@origin exists
Hint: Run `jj bookmark track bookmark1@origin` to import the remote bookmark.
refs: error out push if non-tracking remote branches exist We can provide more actionable error message than "not fast-forwardable". If the push was fast-forwardable, "jj branch track" should be able to merge the remote branch without conflicts, so the added step would be minimal.
2023-10-15 17:43:45 +00:00
Nothing changed.
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
}
#[test]
fn test_git_push_moved_sideways_untracked() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["new", "root()", "-mmoved bookmark1"]);
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
&["bookmark", "set", "--allow-backwards", "bookmark1"],
);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
test_env.jj_cmd_ok(
&workspace_root,
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
&["bookmark", "untrack", "bookmark1@origin"],
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
);
refs: error out push if non-tracking remote branches exist We can provide more actionable error message than "not fast-forwardable". If the push was fast-forwardable, "jj branch track" should be able to merge the remote branch without conflicts, so the added step would be minimal.
2023-10-15 17:43:45 +00:00
let (_stdout, stderr) = test_env.jj_cmd_ok(&workspace_root, &["git", "push"]);
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Warning: Non-tracking remote bookmark bookmark1@origin exists
Hint: Run `jj bookmark track bookmark1@origin` to import the remote bookmark.
refs: error out push if non-tracking remote branches exist We can provide more actionable error message than "not fast-forwardable". If the push was fast-forwardable, "jj branch track" should be able to merge the remote branch without conflicts, so the added step would be minimal.
2023-10-15 17:43:45 +00:00
Nothing changed.
refs: classify push action based on tracking target Although this is logically correct, the error message is a bit cryptic. It's probably better to reject push if non-tracking remote branches exist. #1136
2023-10-14 14:54:35 +00:00
"###);
}
git: prohibit push to remote named "git" Since I'm going to make git::push_branches() update the repo view internally, it should fail fast if the remote name is reserved. Before, the problem was detected on git::import_refs().
2023-10-14 20:11:19 +00:00
#[test]
cargo: bump `git2` to 0.19.0 This includes a bump of `libgit2` to v1.8.1.
2024-07-13 12:29:13 +00:00
// TODO: This test fails with libgit2 v1.8.1 on Windows.
#[cfg(not(target_os = "windows"))]
git: prohibit push to remote named "git" Since I'm going to make git::push_branches() update the repo view internally, it should fail fast if the remote name is reserved. Before, the problem was detected on git::import_refs().
2023-10-14 20:11:19 +00:00
fn test_git_push_to_remote_named_git() {
let (test_env, workspace_root) = set_up();
let git_repo = {
let mut git_repo_path = workspace_root.clone();
git_repo_path.extend([".jj", "repo", "store", "git"]);
git2::Repository::open(&git_repo_path).unwrap()
};
git_repo.remote_rename("origin", "git").unwrap();
let stderr =
test_env.jj_cmd_failure(&workspace_root, &["git", "push", "--all", "--remote=git"]);
insta::assert_snapshot!(stderr, @r###"
bookmarks: update some leftover uses of the word "branch"
2024-09-11 16:11:50 +00:00
Bookmark changes to push to git:
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
Add bookmark bookmark1 to d13ecdbda2a2
Add bookmark bookmark2 to 8476341eb395
git: prohibit push to remote named "git" Since I'm going to make git::push_branches() update the repo view internally, it should fail fast if the remote name is reserved. Before, the problem was detected on git::import_refs().
2023-10-14 20:11:19 +00:00
Error: Git remote named 'git' is reserved for local Git repository
"###);
}
tests: use get_branch_output() helper thoroughly in test_git_*
2024-05-19 01:51:23 +00:00
everything: Rename `branches` to `bookmarks` Jujutsu's branches do not behave like Git branches, which is a major hurdle for people adopting it from Git. They rather behave like Mercurial's (hg) bookmarks. We've had multiple discussions about it in the last ~1.5 years about this rename in the Discord, where multiple people agreed that this _false_ familiarity does not help anyone. Initially we were reluctant to do it but overtime, more and more users agreed that `bookmark` was a better for name the current mechanism. This may be hard break for current `jj branch` users, but it will immensly help Jujutsu's future, by defining it as our first own term. The `[experimental-moving-branches]` config option is currently left alone, to force not another large config update for users, since the last time this happened was when `jj log -T show` was removed, which immediately resulted in breaking users and introduced soft deprecations. This name change will also make it easier to introduce Topics (#3402) as _topological branches_ with a easier model. This was mostly done via LSP, ripgrep and sed and a whole bunch of manual changes either from me being lazy or thankfully pointed out by reviewers.
2024-08-21 19:59:15 +00:00
fn get_bookmark_output(test_env: &TestEnvironment, repo_path: &Path) -> String {
// --quiet to suppress deleted bookmarks hint
test_env.jj_cmd_success(repo_path, &["bookmark", "list", "--all-remotes", "--quiet"])
tests: use get_branch_output() helper thoroughly in test_git_*
2024-05-19 01:51:23 +00:00
}
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink