Discussion for some UI suggestions for source control commit

[Angelk90]

Here are some ideas:

Vscode:

Registrazione.schermo.2025-02-05.alle.12.38.44.mov

Webstorm:

Registrazione.schermo.2025-02-05.alle.12.44.45.mov

Registrazione.schermo.2025-02-05.alle.12.28.04.mov

CodeEdit:

Registrazione.schermo.2025-02-05.alle.13.34.18.mov

Aurora Editor:

[ConradIrwin]

Thanks for sharing!

We were planning to ship with a model similar to Aurora/CodeEdit, but with a few quality of life features. In particular, by default "commit" will work like "commit -a" and include all changes to tracked files; but if you stage with the checkboxes, then you get into "commit staged" workflow.

You'll also be able to open the diff in an editable multibuffer, so you can remove debug statements and fix typos easily.

The checkboxes work much better for keyboard navigation than the split lists, because you can just use space to toggle staged/not, and your focus doesn't get moved around; but we liked VSCode's "just work" by default for people who don't want to even do that.

[Angelk90]

@ConradIrwin : Some suggestions from what I've seen so far:

1. I wouldn't put the commit button inside the input field where you write the commit message, it only gives readability problems.
   I would put it below, in vscode style.
2. If you don't select at least one file, I wouldn't enable the commit button, but especially the field where you write the description.
3. If you write a long message for the commit, using that small box wouldn't be optimal, I would recommend finding a solution.
4. Being able to automatically commit and push, would be great, vscode style.

[ConradIrwin]

👍 We'd like a way for people who don't care about the staging area to commit easily; do you want to try the version on main and see how that feels? We show a "placeholder" state for tracked files so it's clear what'll be committed still.

Pop-out commit and push are on the list!