Add Bitbucket options to History for Selection popup

Issue #65 on hold
Matt Spain created an issue

I'd like to be able to use Bitbucket links when I right-click a commit in the History for Selection popup.

The menu options on Git annotations are great, but they only let me jump to the commit that most recently changed a given line. What I really need is e.g. to be able to look at the filtered commits that apply just to a given function, identify the commit that created that function or made a specific change to it, and see the pull requests associated with it.

Currently the History for Selection is rather limited in that I can't even select a commit in the main Git log (c'mon, JetBrains), so the only thing I can do is copy the commit's revision number, at which point I might as well just paste it into Bitbucket's commit search box and not use the plugin at all.

Thanks for an otherwise excellent plugin! Looking forward to continued improvements.

Comments (4)

  1. Daniil Penkin staff

    Hi @mspain,

    Thanks for the feature suggestion, it makes sense to me. I'll look into adding commit-related actions in the context menu there.

    Meanwhile I found a bit shorter way (doesn't include copy-pasting) from the history for selection modal window to the commit view in Bitbucket. In the same context menu you can select Show All Affected Files which will open another modal describing that commit — it has some Linky actions, so you can navigate to that commit in Bitbucket (or even simply inspect it right in that modal, for instance Ctrl/Cmd + D opens the diff for the selected file).

    Selection history.gif

    Cheers, Daniil

  2. Daniil Penkin staff

    Just a heads up:

    Unfortunately I can’t do anything about the context menu in question for now because there’s no plug-in point there. Actions are created in-place, and there’s no way to add any custom actions. I believe this will change one day but for now only the workaround shown above is available in the History for Selection dialog.

    Basically, unless code linked above change, nothing can be done to improve the workflow. Sad but true.

    Cheers,
    Daniil

  3. Log in to comment