New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reenable lost rebase onto feature from revision grid #10885
Reenable lost rebase onto feature from revision grid #10885
Conversation
242a208
to
72f8f91
Compare
How to document this so the rebase onto is not a hidden feature? |
d29880c
to
9195739
Compare
I have added some documentation in my fork of the documentation repo. You can include it in your PR if you want. Otherwise I will do another PR. As I don't have python, I have not tested my changes.... |
Finally, I have used docker to check my changes. I pushed a fix and the docker script... |
Great, will add that in the generic PRR |
9195739
to
9000e67
Compare
rebaseWithAdvOptionsToolStripMenuItem.Enabled = _rebaseOnTopOf is not null && (selectedRevisions.Count == 1 | ||
|| (selectedRevisions.Count == 2 && selectedRevisions.All(r => !r.IsArtificial))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
rebaseWithAdvOptionsToolStripMenuItem.Enabled = _rebaseOnTopOf is not null && (selectedRevisions.Count == 1 | |
|| (selectedRevisions.Count == 2 && selectedRevisions.All(r => !r.IsArtificial))); | |
rebaseWithAdvOptionsToolStripMenuItem.Enabled = _rebaseOnTopOf is not null | |
&& (selectedRevisions.Count == 1 | |
|| (selectedRevisions.Count == 2 && selectedRevisions.All(r => !r.IsArtificial))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mstv I have applied your suggestion....
Are wee good to go now?
Side note: I need to have my 2 PRs merged before tomorrow otherwise they will have to wait 1 week (AFKB)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe this should be merged now
Side note: I need to have my 2 PRs merged before tomorrow otherwise they will have to wait 1 week (AFKB)
or someone else merge
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
or someone else merge
Indeed but I was more thinking about if it needs some changes on my side....
introduced in v2.44: 324be37 lost in v3.0: a9b7957 but with some improvements: * Allow rebase only when one commit is selected * Don't allow rebase when rebase onto HEAD is selected * Allow rebase onto when 2 commits are selected but only through "advanced options..." * Automatically check "Specific range" checkbox when rebase onto * Improved logic when using "rebase onto" from the "Commands" menu * 1st commit selected is the "from" parameter (that determine the range of commits that will be rebased) * 2nd commit selected is the "onto" parameter (on which commit it will be rebased)
9000e67
to
d69dc33
Compare
introduced in v2.44: 324be37
lost in v3.0: a9b7957
but with some improvements:
Screenshots
Before
When more than one commit selected, we can' rebase (even if some dead code was there to handle it)
After
We can do a rebase onto from menu:
or from contextual menu:
Test methodology
Test environment(s)
Merge strategy
I agree that the maintainer squash merge this PR (if the commit message is clear).
✒️ I contribute this code under The Developer Certificate of Origin.