Skip to content

Enhances remote provider connection flow #4411

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Enhances remote provider connection flow #4411

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+16 −8

Conversation

sergeibbb
Copy link
Member

@sergeibbb sergeibbb commented Jun 18, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

This is a follow-up on #4387

Originates from this conversation:

And there is another thing that I think is worth fixing: handling of the "connect" click should be different. I'm attaching the example how it's handled in Remotes View and in Home. I think on Home it should work the same way as on Remotes View.

How it should work (without a web page, using existing connection):

enable-remotes.mp4

How it works (it passes user through a web page) and what this pull request changes:

image

Checklist

  • I have followed the guidelines in the Contributing document
  • My changes follow the coding style of this project
  • My changes build without any errors or warnings
  • My changes have been formatted and linted
  • My changes include any required corresponding changes to the documentation (including CHANGELOG.md and README.md)
  • My changes have been rebased and squashed to the minimal number (typically 1) of relevant commits
  • My changes have a descriptive commit message with a short title, including a Fixes $XXX - or Closes #XXX - prefix to auto-close the issue that your PR addresses

sergeibbb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 18, 2025
@sergeibbb
Enhances remote provider connection flow
613c7fa 
Updates the connect remote provider flow to directly use the remote name and repository path.

This change simplifies the connection process and ensures accurate remote provider association. Adds remotePath and remoteName to the repository shape.
(#4387, #4411)
@sergeibbb sergeibbb force-pushed the bug/4387-fix-integration-status branch from 8eccc89 to 613c7fa Compare June 18, 2025 13:47
@sergeibbb sergeibbb self-assigned this Jun 18, 2025
@sergeibbb sergeibbb requested review from axosoft-ramint and d13 June 18, 2025 13:48
sergeibbb added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2025
@sergeibbb
Enhances remote provider connection flow
b1c0c73 
Updates the connect remote provider flow to directly use the remote name and repository path.

This change simplifies the connection process and ensures accurate remote provider association. Adds remotePath and remoteName to the repository shape.
(#4387, #4411)
@sergeibbb sergeibbb force-pushed the bug/4387-fix-integration-status branch from 613c7fa to b1c0c73 Compare June 25, 2025 12:04
@sergeibbb sergeibbb requested a review from eamodio June 30, 2025 19:26
@d13 d13 added the area-integrations Issues or features related to integrations label Jul 9, 2025
@sergeibbb
Copy link
Member Author

@axosoft-ramint What do we do with this? Reject, accept, transform to different requirements?

cc @eamodio

axosoft-ramint
axosoft-ramint reviewed Jul 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/git/models/repositoryShape.ts Outdated
Comment on lines 17 to 18
remotePath?: string;
remoteName?: string;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see remotePath being added here but I don't see where it is being used?

Maybe call it bestRemoteName since in the only two places we use this, it's the so-called "best remote" of the repo?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

src/webviews/apps/shared/components/repo-button-group.ts Outdated
{ integrationIds: [provider.integration!.id], source: this.source },
href=${createCommandLink<ConnectRemoteProviderCommandArgs>(
'gitlens.connectRemoteProvider',
{ remote: provider.remoteName!, repoPath: repo.path },
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this guaranteed to be the remote that the current branch is located on since this is where the link is located?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@axosoft-ramint

This is a good question. For picking the right integration the remote is unnecessary, because the only thing that matters is the integration type.

The problem here is setting the default remote when the integration is connected.

The old flow, that goes through the web site (ConnectCloudIntegrationsCommand), does not set the default remote when the integration is connected.
In the new flow the default remote is set to the value of the parameter that might be wrong.

So, I suggest to make the remote field optional and if it's not set, then do not set the default remote on connecting an integration. By doing that we:

  1. keep the old behavior (not setting the remote at all)
  2. won't fail with setting a wrong remote as default.

What do you think?

@justinrobots justinrobots added this to the 17.4 milestone Jul 11, 2025
@sergeibbb
Enhances remote provider connection flow
510dd0b 
Updates the connect remote provider flow to directly use the remote name and repository path.

This change simplifies the connection process and ensures accurate remote provider association. Adds remotePath and remoteName to the repository shape.
(#4387, #4411)
@sergeibbb sergeibbb force-pushed the bug/4387-fix-integration-status branch from 0fc9dfc to 510dd0b Compare July 14, 2025 14:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@axosoft-ramint axosoft-ramint axosoft-ramint left review comments

@d13 d13 Awaiting requested review from d13

@eamodio eamodio Awaiting requested review from eamodio

Assignees

@sergeibbb sergeibbb

Labels
area-integrations Issues or features related to integrations
Projects
None yet
Milestone
17.4
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@sergeibbb @axosoft-ramint @d13 @justinrobots