This new command lets you turn a non colocated git repo into a colocated repo or vice-versa (by using the `jj git colocation enable` and `jj git colocation disable` commands respectively).
These commands simply implement the instructions found in https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/blob/main/docs/git-compatibility.md#converting-a-repo-into-a-co-located-repo
You can also call `jj git colocation status` to show the current colocation status and `jj colocation` to show a help message (with the list of sub-commands).
This is a stripped-down version of cmd_bookmark_set(). Since tags shouldn't
usually be rewritten, I've made it fail on updating existing tags by default.
Closes https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/7189
Colocated repos have some advantages and some disadvantages. On the
whole, I think making Git repos colocated by default is a better
trade-off, especially for new users. With the `git.colocate` setting,
(experienced) users can easily change this according to preference.
A non-exhaustive list of pros and cons of colocated repos:
pros:
* Many code editors show the changes one is currently working on based
on Git's "dirty worktree".
* There are a lot of tools that integrate with Git which don't work at
all in non-colocated repositories.
* There are a lot of Git features that Jujutsu doesn't have yet. When
users ask for them, the answer is usually: "Just colocate your repo
and run git directly for now." It's a strength that Jujutsu can focus
on what makes it special and not have to rush the reimplementation of
every niche feature of Git. Examples: `git rebase` tracking file
renames, `git bisect`, `git tag`, `git range-diff`, submodules.
cons:
* Jujutsu performs worse in colocated repositories with lots of refs,
because of the automatic `jj git import`.
* Colocated repos make branch@git references show up in Jujutsu output,
which is usually just aesthetically displeasing or possibly even
confusing to inexperienced users.
* Interleaving jj and (mutating) git commands can lead to confusing
situations. Examples:
* Creating a commit with git instead of jj will often leave a
duplicate "work in progress" commit in Jujutsu's log.
* Some IDEs periodically run `git fetch` in the background. This can
lead to conflicted branches and divergent change IDs, something many
people struggle with.
Now that https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/pull/7275 has merged it's worth
mentioning that simple fetch refspecs will (now) be respected when other
branches are otherwise not specified on the CLI
When read/writing commits from the git-backend, populate the git commit
header with a backwards hash of the `change-id`. This should enable
preserving change identity across various git remotes assuming a
cooperative git server that doesn't strip the git header.
This feature is behind a `git.write-change-id-header` configuration flag
at least to start.
Use `jj new && jj undo` instead of `jj new @-` at the end of converting to a
co-located repository, because the latter "stashes" newly added working copy
changes into a sibling commit.
See also: https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/discussions/4945
Signed-off-by: Tim Janik <timj@gnu.org>
This makes it easier to work with multiple remotes at once while
tracking the default branch of the remote used to create the local
repository:
```shell
$ jj git clone --remote upstream https://github.com/upstream-org/repo
$ cd repo
$ jj git remote add origin git@github.com:your-org/repo
$ jj config set --repo git.fetch upstream
```
In the example above, `upstream` is the repository containing the
reference source code that you might want to patch, while `origin` is
your fork where pull-request will be pushed. The branch `main@upstream`
will be tracked.
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.
This adds an initial `jj util gc` command, which simply calls `git gc`
when using the Git backend. That should already be useful in
non-colocated repos because it's not obvious how to GC (repack) such
repos. In my own jj repo, it shrunk `.jj/repo/store/` from 2.4 GiB to
780 MiB, and `jj log --ignore-working-copy` was sped up from 157 ms to
86 ms.
I haven't added any tests because the functionality depends on having
`git` binary on the PATH, which we don't yet depend on anywhere
else. I think we'll still be able to test much of the future parts of
garbage collection without a `git` binary because the interesting
parts are about manipulating the Git repo before calling `git gc` on
it.
As suggested by @yuja in
https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/issues/1841#issuecomment-1720451152
Thanks to @lazywei for pointing out that `git pack-refs --all` is better, at
least on the first run. I haven't checked, but suspect, that because of the
number of `refs/jj` refs jj creates, it might always be better.
https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/discussions/2230 indicates a lot of
interest in this, so we'd probably want to support this officially at
some point. Until then, document a script that has worked well-enough
for some of us.
This makes it possible to use ed25519 and ed25519-sk keys by trying
them one at a time. However, it still fails if one of them is
password-protected; we don't try the next key in that case.
This bug concerns the way `import_refs` that gets called by `fetch` computes
the heads that should be visible after the import.
Previously, the list of such heads was computed *before* local branches were
updated based on changes to the remote branches. So, commits that should have
been abandoned based on this update of the local branches weren't properly
abandoned.
Now, `import_refs` tracks the heads that need to be visible because of some ref
in a mapping keyed by the ref. If the ref moves or is deleted, the
corresponding heads are updated.
Fixes#864
This adds a `jj sparse` command with options to list and manage the
set of paths to include in the working copy. It only supports includes
(postive matches) for now.
I'm not sure "sparse" is the best name for the feature. Perhaps it
would make sense as a subcommand under `jj workspace` - maybe `jj
workspace track`? However, there's also `jj untrack` for removing a
file from the working copy and leaving it in the working copy. I'm
happy to hear suggestions, or we can get back to the naming later.
It probably doesn't make sense to respect Git's `core.excludesFile`
config when not running in a Git-backed repo, but we also already
respect `.gitignore` files in the working copy regardless of backend,
so at least it's consistent with that. We can revisit it when the
native backend becomes a reasonable choice.
Closes#87.
