Colocation is about sharing the working copy between jj and git. It's
less important where the repo is stored. I therefore think we should
not call it "colocated repo". I considered renaming it to "colocated
working copy" but that sounded awkward in many places because we often
talk about the whole workspace (repo + working copy), so "In colocated
workspaces with a very large number of branches or other refs" sounds
better than "In colocated working copies with a very large number of
branches or other refs".
Once we support colocate workspaces in non-main Git worktrees, I think
this rename will be even more relevant because then all those
workspaces share the same repo but only some of them may be colocated.
With this change a warning is shown if the user does not explicitly specify the target revision, but the behavior is unchanged (it still defaults to the working copy).
In the future the warning will be turned into an error. In other words, it will be required to specify target revision.
The bulk of the changes here are to prepare tests for the upcoming change, to make the transition easier.
For additional details please see:
* https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/issues/5374
* https://github.com/jj-vcs/jj/discussions/5363
If you have multiple remotes to push to, you might want to keep some changes
(such as security patches) in your private fork. Git CLI has one upstream remote
per branch, but jj supports multiple tracking remotes, and therefore "jj git
push" can start tracking new remotes automatically.
This patch makes new bookmarks not eligible for push by default. I considered
adding a warning, but it's not always possible to interrupt the push shortly
after a warning is emitted.
--all implies --allow-new because otherwise it's equivalent to --tracked. It's
also easier to write a conflict rule with --all/--deleted/--tracked than with
two of them.
-c/--change doesn't require --allow-new because it is the flag to create new
tracking bookmark.
#1278
`jj bookmark` is a frequently used command. Its subcommands already have
one letter aliases. Defining `jj b` as an alias for `jj bookmarks` make
bookmarks really easy to use.
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.
