Saiya Posted December 25, 2022 Share Posted December 25, 2022 (edited) Search bookmarks in SourceTree and launch them in Alfred. Features support fuzzy search can open repo in your code editor directly by press cmd + enter, using VS Code by default, you can custom it can reveal repo in find by press option + enter get this workflow from: https://github.com/oe/sourcetree-alfred-workflow Credits: This is a swift clone of Alfred_SourceTree by yourtion. Due to the latest release of macOS 12.3, python2 has been removed, which broke the original workflow. So I reimplemented this workflow in Swift. It should be much more stable and faster. Edited December 30, 2022 by Saiya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted December 25, 2022 Share Posted December 25, 2022 This is using Workflow Environment Variables instead of Workflow Configuration and there’s no backgroundless screenshot with shadow. Please see the pinned post for submission requirements. Happy holidays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted December 26, 2022 Author Share Posted December 26, 2022 22 hours ago, vitor said: This is using Workflow Environment Variables instead of Workflow Configuration and there’s no backgroundless screenshot with shadow. Please see the pinned post for submission requirements. Happy holidays. Thanks for your correction, I've released a new version that support Workflow Configuration, along with a new backgroundless screenshot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted December 27, 2022 Share Posted December 27, 2022 You shouldn’t be overwriting PATH, as you’re making it smaller than Alfred’s own. And it seems you forgot to add the packaged workflow to the release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted December 27, 2022 Author Share Posted December 27, 2022 2 hours ago, vitor said: You shouldn’t be overwriting PATH, as you’re making it smaller than Alfred’s own. And it seems you forgot to add the packaged workflow to the release. Just fixed that😅 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted December 27, 2022 Share Posted December 27, 2022 While testing found other small issues. Specifically, the detection of SourceTree isn’t accurate if the app is installed but no repos have been added. In that case the workflow says SourceTree isn’t yet installed, which will be confusing. It would be more accurate to show no repos have been added. It should do no harm to simply remove the check if you don’t have a better alternative, because app dependencies are listed and linked to in the Gallery (as an example see Moom, right before Usage). Plus, the name and functionality of the workflow make it fairly obvious. You also have a deprecation warning. workflow.swift:42:12: warning: 'init(cString:encoding:)' is deprecated: Use String(_ scalar: Unicode.Scalar) return String(cString: &sysInfo.machine.0, encoding: .utf8) == "arm64" ^ Finally, while I do get your point in offering to compile the script, at least for now lets avoid it. After the first run, subsequent runs should go faster anyway even when calling it as a script. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted December 27, 2022 Author Share Posted December 27, 2022 47 minutes ago, vitor said: While testing found other small issues. Specifically, the detection of SourceTree isn’t accurate if the app is installed but no repos have been added. In that case the workflow says SourceTree isn’t yet installed, which will be confusing. It would be more accurate to show no repos have been added. It should do no harm to simply remove the check if you don’t have a better alternative, because app dependencies are listed and linked to in the Gallery (as an example see Moom, right before Usage). Plus, the name and functionality of the workflow make it fairly obvious. You also have a deprecation warning. workflow.swift:42:12: warning: 'init(cString:encoding:)' is deprecated: Use String(_ scalar: Unicode.Scalar) return String(cString: &sysInfo.machine.0, encoding: .utf8) == "arm64" ^ Finally, while I do get your point in offering to compile the script, at least for now lets avoid it. After the first run, subsequent runs should go faster anyway even when calling it as a script. 1. the confusing message only show up when you have SourceTree installed but never launched it, so the bookmarks configuration files won't be created. I'll try a better approach to do the check 2. the warning does not affect its function, I will do more research to get rid of it 3. I would insist on compiling the script, Swift JIT is now much slower on macOS Ventura, even on M1 machines, and much worse on Intel macs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted December 27, 2022 Share Posted December 27, 2022 1 hour ago, Saiya said: the confusing message only show up when you have SourceTree installed but never launched it Nope, I had it launched and it was still telling me it was not installed. Only once I added a repo was it fixed. 1 hour ago, Saiya said: I would insist on compiling the script You’re also compiling the script into the workflow’s directory itself, meaning it will be deleted every time there’s an update and require recompilation. If you remove that option the workflow can be added soon and we can then work on a better solution. Otherwise it’ll take a bit longer to consider since we’d like to avoid those kinds of operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted December 28, 2022 Author Share Posted December 28, 2022 22 hours ago, vitor said: Nope, I had it launched and it was still telling me it was not installed. Only once I added a repo was it fixed. You’re also compiling the script into the workflow’s directory itself, meaning it will be deleted every time there’s an update and require recompilation. If you remove that option the workflow can be added soon and we can then work on a better solution. Otherwise it’ll take a bit longer to consider since we’d like to avoid those kinds of operations. OK, the `compile` option has been removed. On 12/27/2022 at 10:55 PM, Saiya said: 1. the confusing message only show up when you have SourceTree installed but never launched it, so the bookmarks configuration files won't be created. I'll try a better approach to do the check 2. the warning does not affect its function, I will do more research to get rid of it 3. I would insist on compiling the script, Swift JIT is now much slower on macOS Ventura, even on M1 machines, and much worse on Intel macs issue 2, the code has been commented out; issue 1 needs further researching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted December 30, 2022 Author Share Posted December 30, 2022 On 12/27/2022 at 10:55 PM, Saiya said: 1. the confusing message only show up when you have SourceTree installed but never launched it, so the bookmarks configuration files won't be created. I'll try a better approach to do the check 2. the warning does not affect its function, I will do more research to get rid of it 3. I would insist on compiling the script, Swift JIT is now much slower on macOS Ventura, even on M1 machines, and much worse on Intel macs issue 1 has been fixed, the icon of this workflow has been updated too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 Thank you for the changes, this will be live soon. Have you noticed that you have both workflow and workflow.swift, which are duplicates of each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted January 10 Author Share Posted January 10 On 1/7/2023 at 1:50 AM, vitor said: Thank you for the changes, this will be live soon. Have you noticed that you have both workflow and workflow.swift, which are duplicates of each other? Yes, I just leave a hidden way to compile script in case of any one complain about the performance issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vitor Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 I noticed that, but you shouldn’t need both files since they are identical, you can compile and run either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saiya Posted January 11 Author Share Posted January 11 22 hours ago, vitor said: I noticed that, but you shouldn’t need both files since they are identical, you can compile and run either. It's the simplest way with a little cost to make the compiling procedure reproducible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now