docs(cli): clarify picker workflow boundaries#240
Merged
barrettruth merged 2 commits intomainfrom Apr 13, 2026
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
The command surface and picker surface had drifted conceptually. Recent fixes moved direct
:Forgeflows away from picker dependencies, but the docs did not clearly spell out which workflows requirefzf-luaand which forge actions are expected to remain available directly through the Ex command interface.Solution
Document the boundary explicitly and add a regression spec that pins command parity for non-list forge actions. The updated docs now state that
fzf-luais for interactive picker and listing workflows, while:Forgecovers direct explicit actions with stable targets. Picker-only behavior is called out as list navigation, row-scoped helpers, nested checks, and local git navigation.