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.
If movement commands don't find a target commit, they fail. However,
it's usually not intuitive why they fail because in non-edit mode the
start commit is the parent of the working commit.
Adding the start commit change hash to the error message makes it easier
for the user to figure out what is going on.
Also, specifying 'No **other** descendant...' helps make it clear what
`jj` is really looking for.
Part of #3947
* We started with a tristate flag where:
- Auto - Maintain current behaviour. This edits if
the wc parent is not a head commit. Else, it will
create a new commit on the parent of the wc in
the direction of movement.
- Always - Always edit
- Never - Never edit, prefer the new+squash workflow.
However, consensus the review thread is that `auto` mode where we try to infer when to
switch to `edit mode`, should be removed. So `ui.movement.edit` is a boolean flag now.
- true: edit mode
- false: new+squash mode
* Also add a `--no-edit` flag as the explicit inverse of `--edit` and
ensure both flags take precedence over the config.
* Update tests that assumed edit mode inference, to specify `--edit` explicitly.
NOTE: #4302 was squashed into this commit, so see that closed PR for review history.
Part of #3947
The code in both cli/src/commands/{next,prev}.rs is identical except
for the direction of movement. This commit pull the parts that make
sense out into cli/src/movement_util.rs so it's easier to see the
differences.
Part of #3947
Add gratuitous `jj log` output to more points in the tests.
This makes it easier to understand the intended changes
by literally visualizing the commit tree we are after each movement.
This is at least useful for me since I find the new+squash workflow
confusing.
Test behaviour is not changed.
Part of #3947
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.
There are several bugs in both the tests and in the implementation
that are made more clear by showing the log output before and after
running the command.
This allows users to jump to the next conflict in the ancestors or children of
the start commit.
Continues work on #2126
Co-Authored-By: Noah Mayr <dev@noahmayr.com>
Before this commit `jj prev` fails if the current working copy commit is a
merge commit. After this commit it will prompt the user to choose the ancestor
they want to select.
#2126
This commit adds commit graphs to most of the tests for `jj prev` to make it
clearer where `@` points before and after `prev` is run.
In addition, there were a couple of tests where the comments suggested the test
meant to have `@` pointing to a specific commit, but it actually pointed to an
empty child of that commit.
This sort of issue also exists in `test_prev_editing`. The test is supposed to
check that `--edit` is implied if you run `jj prev` on an interior commit, but
it actually caused a new empty commit to be created since `@` was sitting on a
tip commit.
Users who edit non-head commits usually expect `jj next/prev` to
continue to edit the next/previous commit, so let's make that the
default behavior. This should not confuse users who don't edit
non-head commits since they will simply not be in this state. My main
concern is that doing `jj next; jj prev` will now usually take you
back to the previous commit, but not if you started on the parent of a
head commit.
this greatly speeds up the time to run all tests, at the cost of slightly larger recompile times for individual tests.
this unfortunately adds the requirement that all tests are listed in `runner.rs` for the crate.
to avoid forgetting, i've added a new test that ensures the directory is in sync with the file.
## benchmarks
before this change, recompiling all tests took 32-50 seconds and running a single test took 3.5 seconds:
```
; hyperfine 'touch lib/src/lib.rs && cargo t --test test_working_copy'
Time (mean ± σ): 3.543 s ± 0.168 s [User: 2.597 s, System: 1.262 s]
Range (min … max): 3.400 s … 3.847 s 10 runs
```
after this change, recompiling all tests take 4 seconds:
```
; hyperfine 'touch lib/src/lib.rs ; cargo t --test runner --no-run'
Time (mean ± σ): 4.055 s ± 0.123 s [User: 3.591 s, System: 1.593 s]
Range (min … max): 3.804 s … 4.159 s 10 runs
```
and running a single test takes about the same:
```
; hyperfine 'touch lib/src/lib.rs && cargo t --test runner -- test_working_copy'
Time (mean ± σ): 4.129 s ± 0.120 s [User: 3.636 s, System: 1.593 s]
Range (min … max): 3.933 s … 4.346 s 10 runs
```
about 1.4 seconds of that is the time for the runner, of which .4 is the time for the linker. so
there may be room for further improving the times.
This is a naive implementation, which cannot deal with multiple children
or parents stemming from merges.
Note: I gave each command separate a separate argument struct
for extensibility.
Fixes#878
