It would be helpful to have an option that allows to reduce the complexity of the log graph by showing only commits that are tagged, or somewhat decorated (like head of branhces, etc.), still keeping branch and merge points visible.

In essence, the result should be what you get on the command line with:

git log --graph --simplify-by-decoration --oneline

That would make it much easier to grasp the history of repos that have long lived branches with hundreds of commits, which are seldom merged and tagged.

On the UI, this option could be a button/menu next to the filter text box, or could be triggered by a special "keyword" typed directly there, like "tagged" or "decorated" (with some special character perhaps? like #tagged or #decorated)

When I start typing and selection start jumping in the branches tree I would go one step further and actually filter the branches tree.. that way I can be better guided into finding what I'm looking for. 

Who ever worked with Jetbrains Rider or other IDE they know what I mean. Virtually EVERY list () can be quick-filtered on the spot which is very powerful. 

We copy full Commit / File name (with details) by Ctrl+C, and short Commit name by Ctrl+Shift+C.

Please realize copying short file name (i.e. filename only) by Ctrl+Shift+C.

Please support working with Git-providers based on https://gogs.io/

Currently, the "Branches" pane shows a count of the number of branches in each top-level group (e.g. "Local Branches (3)" or "origin (27)"). And when "Group tags and branches by path-like name" is selected, there's a sub-group for each initial path component, with all branches having the same path component underneath that group.

Problem: we use path grouping for different developers, and some developers have gotten out of control on how many of their branches are still hanging around. But, it's hard to see which developer has lots of branches and which has few.

Suggestion: have the sub-groups display the count of branches within that sub-group.

Hi

while the font size of the SG application is configurable with the defaultSize ui low level props, the font size of the Merge request comments is apparently fixed and very small (the comments are almost unreadable). Is there a way to increase this font? If not, it should be possible to do it, please!

Thanks in advance

It would be great to run external tools on other contexts than the whole repo and files.

E.g., I like to manually prune remote branches. But for a repository with more than one remote, I cannot do this without using the command line because I cannot select the correct remote context to run my command.

Similarly, it would be great to also have tools available on branches and tags.

The easiest way for the user would be to add a "Tools" sub-menu entry on the context menu of the branches view items (and maybe the captions in the log graph).

This caption should similarly to the confirmation dialogue parse the replacements, so that the user can get a good description of what will happen.

For example:

label: "Prune remote branches of ${remoteName}"

command: ${git} fetch --prune ${remoteUrl}

Can we have fast-forward merge feature for branch in Standard workflow?

Hi,

I'm using a non-commercial license to access public repos. Every time I had to click to "verify this repo" - it is very annoying and unnecessary. If I'm using a non-commercial license, it's expected that I will keep only public repos inside SmarGit since I cannot open private ones anyway.

Please don't make the life of non-commercial users more difficult.

When you LKM on a file and click 'Log' - it shows filtered history with only commits that changed that file, but it doesn't show stashed changes. The 'Branches' menu in 'Log for <file>' window doesn't have 'Stashes' folder, while 'Log'  window does have it.