Git - Conflict notification should be actionable

[daviddossett]

Feels like this should have a button to open the merge editor. Thoughts @jrieken @hediet @isidorn?

[jrieken]

Yeah, that's a blast from the past when there was no merge editor. It is a good opportunity to "sell" that now

[isidorn]

Maybe this should not be a notification at all? Does this happen on commit, maybe it should be a modal dialog with an option to open 3-way merge.

[daviddossett]

I saw it when I merged my branch with another. A dialog could work but might feel very intrusive. Would be good to try both to see how it feels assuming we can just use modal: true on the notification to test it.

[isidorn]

@daviddossett aha, so if it can just happen with you merging branches from terminal than a dialog is too much. I agree that the notification is better.

[jrieken]

Low-hanging: add command to "Open SCM View"

[jrieken]

@lszomoru leaving this up to SCM land. This is specific to 3wm and I don't even know how to trigger this...

[lszomoru]

Updated the notification to be more actionable:

[osortega]

Not sure if I'm doing the steps right since I'm getting a modal kind of notification, but I don't see the Show Changes button.

The steps I did were:

1. Change a file in the main branch directly through github.com
2. Commit a conflicting change through the local cloned repo
3. Try to push the change to the remote through source control

[lszomoru]

The improvements that we have made are scoped to conflicts during merge. Verification steps:

• Open a workspace that contains a git repository
• Modify the same file in two branches to create a conflict
• Perform a merge between the two branches
  • Confirm that the following dialog is shown:
    
  • Confirm that pressing the "Show Changes" buttons open the Source Control Changes view