- **Revert "livekit: Preserve tokens on channel rejoin (#59388)"**
- **Revert "call: Log LiveKit connection info refresh outcomes in retry
loop (#59205)"**
- **Revert "audio: Fix phantom presence in channels (#59195)"**
- **proto: Reserve RejoinRoomResponse field 4 after revert**
We've observed a spike of phantom collaborator issues after this fixes.
This sucks and I'm quite unhappy about it.
# Objective
- Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses.
- If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as
[described in the GitHub
docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword).
## Solution
- Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how?
- Are there any parts that need more testing?
- How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything
specific they need to know?
- If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are
there any important ones you can't test?
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
## Showcase
> This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change
or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section.
- Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your
awesome work!
- If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot,
GIF, or video
- A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing
features!
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a
toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
<details>
<summary>Click to view showcase</summary>
My super cool demos here
</details>
---
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This allows one to "bless" arbitrary parent path, without making
assumptions about the structure of the project storage on users machine.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how?
- Are there any parts that need more testing?
- How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything
specific they need to know?
- If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are
there any important ones you can't test?
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
## Showcase
> This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change
or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section.
- Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your
awesome work!
- If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot,
GIF, or video
- A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing
features!
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a
toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
<details>
<summary>Click to view showcase</summary>
My super cool demos here
</details>
---
Release Notes:
- When opening a project for the first time, you can now auto-trust
arbitrary parent path; previously Zed offered affordance for
auto-trusting a parent of a parent only.
- **collab: Don't revoke LiveKit token when rejoining the same channel**
- **call: Bound LiveKit reconnect attempts and decouple from collab
rejoin**
# Objective
- Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses.
- If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as
[described in the GitHub
docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword).
## Solution
- Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how?
- Are there any parts that need more testing?
- How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything
specific they need to know?
- If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are
there any important ones you can't test?
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
## Showcase
> This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change
or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section.
- Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your
awesome work!
- If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot,
GIF, or video
- A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing
features!
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a
toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
<details>
<summary>Click to view showcase</summary>
My super cool demos here
</details>
---
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Follow-up to #59195. While verifying that fix against prod we hit a log
that couldn't distinguish "retrying with a fresh token that is still
revoked" from "silently retrying with the same dead token because the
server returned no connection info" (e.g. a collab deploy predating
#59195). Make the retry loop self-diagnosing:
- Warn when `RejoinRoomResponse` carries no `live_kit_connection_info`,
since the loop then reuses the existing token.
- On refresh, log whether the token actually changed.
Release Notes:
- N/A
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
# Objective
We were not caching builds for nightly/bundling jobs AT ALL.
## Solution
## Testing
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Release Notes:
- N/A
# Objective
You know that feeling? You join the channel, crack a banger joke to
break the ice - yet, nobody laughs. Worse yet, you're swarmed with Slack
messages like "Piotr, we can't hear you". After a while you realize that
maybe it's for the best as the joke was not as good as you've initially
thought, but still: it's possible to get into a state where other
participants see you as muted. You don't hear anybody. Bummer.
That's what happened when we were hoping to pair with @dinocosta today.
I could not hear him. However, he had some logs to share which indicated
that while collab thought he's in the room with me, live-kit was
rejecting his token as it was revoked.
What clanker helped us figure out is that there's a race-y code path
where if you disconnect from a given room abruptly, collab can put you
in a limbo.
<details><summary>Clanker's idea of what's going on</summary>
<p>
Found the whole story. Here's what those logs mean and where the bug
surface is.
What's happening
The error at room.rs:1809 is the detach_and_log_err on the task spawned
by spawn_room_connection (crates/call/src/call_impl/room.rs:1754-1810).
So this is the initial livekit::Room::connect call failing — the LiveKit
SDK internally retried 3 times (that's the retrying... (1/3) lines), got
401 invalid token: revoked every time, gave up, and the error propagated
out of the ? at line 1762 and was logged-and-dropped.
The "revoked" comes from the collab server: leave_room_for_session
(crates/collab/src/rpc.rs:4091-4095) calls
live_kit.remove_participant(livekit_room,
session.user_id().to_string()), and LiveKit Cloud treats a removed
participant's token as revoked. Crucially, the LiveKit identity is just
the user id, not the connection id, while the DB-side
leave_room(connection_id) is per-connection. leave_room_for_session
fires from three places:
1. Explicit leave (rpc.rs:1666)
2. connection_lost, after RECONNECT_TIMEOUT expires (rpc.rs:1342)
3. Stale-connection cleanup when re-joining a channel (rpc.rs:3401)
So there's a race: an old connection's delayed cleanup (path 2) can fire
after the same user has rejoined the room on a new connection and been
issued a fresh token — and remove_participant(room, user_id)
kicks/revokes the user's current LiveKit participant, because the
identity is shared across connections. Quick restart of Zed, two
instances, or a reconnect that straddles the server's RECONNECT_TIMEOUT
all set this up.
Client-side consequences (this connects to your first question)
When that initial connect fails:
- this.live_kit stays None and this.diagnostics is never created — lines
1780-1791 only run on success. So in this failure mode CallDiagnostics
doesn't exist at all; the "stats never overridden" path I described
earlier isn't even reached.
- There is no retry and no token refresh. The failure is
detach_and_log_err'd and that's the end of it. The user stays in the
room at the collab level (status is still Online, they appear in the
channel), but with no audio and no way to recover short of leaving and
rejoining.
- Even a collab-level reconnect doesn't help: RejoinRoomResponse
(crates/proto/proto/call.proto:58) carries no live_kit_connection_info,
and rejoin() never calls spawn_room_connection — the LiveKit connection
is established exactly once, in Room::new, with the token from the
original join response.
So the user-visible symptom is: you're "in" the call, everyone sees you,
but you can't hear or be heard, and there's no error surfaced in the UI
— just this log line.
If you want to fix it, the two angles are server-side (make
leave_room_for_session skip the LiveKit removal when the user still has
a live connection in that room, or scope LiveKit identities
per-connection) and client-side (treat a failed spawn_room_connection as
fatal-but-recoverable: surface it, and have rejoin request fresh
connection info instead of silently carrying on). Happy to dig into
either if you want.
</p>
</details>
So tl;dr: our token was swapped out underneath us. One way to "fix" it
was to just go into another channel, but that was a bummer.
We have a good and reliable repro for it though: `kill -9 $ZED_PID`
followed by an attempt to rejoin the same channel within 30s would
consistently put us in that state.
Put another way: you panic and thus do not send a clean "leave room"
message to LK. if you rejoin the channel within 30s (after restarting),
LK will invalidate the very token you're attempting to use (as it cleans
up old tokens).
It may also happen without crashing, but that's the most reliable way to
repro the issue. Long story short your LK token gets tainted and you
can't share the audio anyhow.
## Solution
The fix is both client and server-side.
On client's side, we now retry the reconnection with a back-off and we
grab a fresh token off of reconnect attempts.
On server's side, we share the current token on room reconnect attempts.
We've also tweaked the call diagnostics to not use `unwrap_or_default`
so much: it was hard for us to tell that we're in a totally bogus state
and we've only reached that conclusion based on source code analysis. We
now show some generic "ok you're in a borked state pls report a bug"
message instead.
## Testing
We added tests that present the flacky scenario. We've also tried to
setup an infra to test the new behaviour, but sadly, local LK instance
seems to revoke tokens more leniently than the prod..
OTOH, we are quite confident that once new collab is deployed, we'll be
able to mince the new tokens and life is going to be good. Even when
running against the current prod instance we could see that our code
changed the behaviour for the better, as now we'll actually try to use a
new token if one is provided by collab. For that to happen we need to
redeploy though.
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Release Notes:
- Fixed a race condition that caused collab users to not receive/send
any audio to their peers.
---------
Co-authored-by: dino <dinojoaocosta@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Dino <dino@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: zed-zippy[bot] <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Context
`apply_remote_edit` and `apply_local_edit` rebuild the fragment
`SumTree` through `FragmentBuilder`. Since #51941, the builder collapsed
the entire tree into a flat `Vec<Fragment>` (cloning every fragment) and
rebuilt a fresh tree from scratch on every call. The new tree shared no
nodes with the previous one, so each edit cost O(N) in the *total*
number of fragments: clone all fragments, allocate an entirely new tree,
and then free the whole previous tree on assignment — the last part
showing up as a large amount of time spent dropping `SumTree`s.
That batching was a deliberate win for the bulk `replace_all` path
(#51941, one `edit()` carrying millions of ranges), but it penalizes
every other caller — most notably `apply_remote_edit`, which runs once
per op in a loop in `apply_ops` and so rebuilt the whole tree per remote
operation.
## This change
Make `FragmentBuilder` chunk-based. Appended slices are kept as intact
`SumTree` subtrees, so they keep sharing nodes with the previous tree;
only individually pushed fragments are batched into `Vec`s.
`to_sum_tree` appends the shared subtrees (touching just the right
spine) and builds the loose runs in one pass, parallelizing the large
ones.
Net effect:
- Small edits on large/heavily-fragmented buffers (the
`apply_remote_edit` collaborative path) go back to O(edited + log N)
with a cheap drop, instead of O(total fragments).
- The bulk `replace_all` path keeps its batched build and is not
regressed.
## Benchmarks
Using the file from #38927 (619 MB CSV, 10,325,246 matches of `"` →
`""`), `release-fast`:
| Case | flatten (#51941) | this PR |
|---|---|---|
| `replace_all` (all matches) | 50.70 s | 45.16 s |
| replace 1 match (`--single`) | 16.0 ms | 16.0 ms |
`replace_all` is ~11% faster and not regressed. The
single-match-on-a-freshly-loaded-file case is unchanged, because a fresh
`Buffer::local` is barely fragmented, so even the from-scratch rebuild
is cheap there; the structural-sharing win is on heavily-fragmented
buffers receiving small edits.
The `--single` flag added to `editor_benchmarks` makes the latter case
measurable.
Release Notes:
- Improved the performance of applying edits to large buffers
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This reduces a rebuild time from editor (a legit one) from 28s to 18s.
For those of you who do use the debugger, there's a new `dbg` profile.
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Helps with https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/38927
- **editor: Add a benchmark for find/replace**
- **text: batch fragment insertions before turning them into a SumTree**
## Context
<!-- What does this PR do, and why? How is it expected to impact users?
Not just what changed, but what motivated it and why this approach.
Link to Linear issue (e.g., ENG-123) or GitHub issue (e.g., Closes#456)
if one exists — helps with traceability. -->
## How to Review
<!-- Help reviewers focus their attention:
- For small PRs: note what to focus on (e.g., "error handling in
foo.rs")
- For large PRs (>400 LOC): provide a guided tour — numbered list of
files/commits to read in order. (The `large-pr` label is applied
automatically.)
- See the review process guidelines for comment conventions -->
## Self-Review Checklist
<!-- Check before requesting review: -->
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Release Notes:
- Improved performance of "Replace All" in buffer search
---------
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
tl;dr: you can now run `cargo xtask setup_webrtc`, which:
1. Fetches webrtc artifacts into a gitignored directory in Zed repo
2. Adds a [env] section to `~/.cargo/config.toml` on your box which
forces
LK to NOT download webrtc artifacts as a part of its build script
The end result: `cargo clean` is no longer a horrid experience with in
horrid network environments.
Caveats:
1. This does not handle appending to existing cargo config. The setup
script will fail if there's one in place.
2. You need to redo this thing (fetch env var and whatnot) whenever LK
version is bumped.
3. This is not mandatory for builds to work. You only really have to do
this for your own convenience, but builds will work just fine without it
(unless your connection sucks).
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
We had an internal report of soft wrap not working in git panel's commit
editor. Given the following settings:
```json
{
"languages": {
"Git Commit": {
"preferred_line_length": 80,
"soft_wrap": "preferred_line_length",
},
},
}
```
We would not soft-wrap in narrow viewports. As it turned out, the
problem was that we were always prefering a `preferred_line_length` as
our soft wrap boundary over the actual width of the editor.
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- Fixed git commits editor not respecting soft wrap boundaries.
- settings: Removed `"soft_wrap": "preferred_line_length"` in favour of
`"soft_wrap": "bounded"`. Soft wrap now always respects editor width
when it's enabled.
This relies on 1.94s --workspace option we've added to cargo
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
This fixes a crash with new Preview versions of tsgo after
https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/pull/3313
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
- **Remove some of the settings types from ui**
- **drag settings-less ui across the line**
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <me@lukaswirth.dev>
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
This will allow us to use UI crate on the web
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Zed Zippy <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Self-Review Checklist:
- [ ] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [ ] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [ ] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [ ] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [ ] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
We've decided to remove rodio backend for audio as we didn't have time
to get it to a nice spot. I personally believe we should eventually
re-land it (the composable pipelines are quite nice!), but given that we
need audio to work, this seems like the best way forward. We won't have
to worry about all the ways in which the legacy pipeline interoped with
rodio's.
## Self-Review Checklist
<!-- Check before requesting review: -->
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Release Notes:
- audio: Experimental rodio audio backend has been removed.
---------
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Yara <git@yara.blue>
Co-authored-by: Jakub Konka <kubkon@jakubkonka.com>
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- Improve recovery of audio latency after CPU-intensive period.
Co-authored-by: Jakub Konka <kubkon@jakubkonka.com>
Co-authored-by: Jakub Konka <jakub@zed.dev>
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- Fixed issues with tremendous audio latency in long-running collab
calls.
Co-authored-by: Jakub Konka <jakub@zed.dev>
This will help with test times (in some cases), as nextest cannot figure
out whether a given rdep is actually an alive edge of the build graph
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
Fixes ZED-517
Can be reproed by:
Going into server options of the last server on your list.
selecting "Remove server".
Clicking on the button AND issuing menu::Confirm action at the same time
(well, roughly the same time).
The result: OS pop-up is issued twice; if the user does confirm twice,
that's when that panic is hit.
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- Fixed a potential crash when deleting SSH servers too eagerly.
Closes#50701
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [x] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [x] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
The failure in #49661 was caused by a broken pipe, which then led to
tests not being ran.
Co-authored-by: Marshall Bowers <marshall@zed.dev>
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
Co-authored-by: Marshall Bowers <marshall@zed.dev>
Closes #ISSUE
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
#2874 on steroids
Before you mark this PR as ready for review, make sure that you have:
- [ ] Added a solid test coverage and/or screenshots from doing manual
testing
- [ ] Done a self-review taking into account security and performance
aspects
- [ ] Aligned any UI changes with the [UI
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Eric Holk <eric@zed.dev>
Reverts zed-industries/zed#48607
The problem we've ran into is that CI started reusing already-cached
runs from newer branches (that did not have that change pulled in).
Yet this unveiled another potential issue, which is that relying on
mtime might make it so that an artifact for a different (newer) commit
would be reused by an unrelated run of CI.
The answer is: checksum-based-freshness.
Release Notes:
- N/A
- **build: remove assistant_slash_commands dependency in
assistant_text_thread**
- **diagnostics: Do not depend on search**
- **Remove terminal_view's dependency on search**
- **sever breadcrumbs <-> editor dep (for the sake of terminal_view)**
Release Notes:
- N/A
Finn found out the hard way that the new cool tech does not quite work
at times. Back to the drawing board we go (at least partially).
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A
This reduces e.g. agent_ui's LLVM lines from 1.95m to 1.7m ( -> 56009 ->
50899).
git_ui: 1.02 -> 0.917m (30700 functions -> 27496)
Overall, anything that implements `Render` should benefit. OTOH `editor`
does not, because it has a custom `Element` impl.
Release Notes:
- N/A
Closes#48097
Release Notes:
- Fixed Copilot instances not being cleared up after their window is
closed.
- Copilot edit prediction provider now respects `disable_ai` setting.
Closes: #46593#32635#47924
Co-authored-by: Anthony Eid <hello@anthonyeid.me>
Co-authored-by: Cole Miller <cole@zed.dev>
Release Notes:
- Fixed issues with signing into Copilot via the Settings UI
---------
Co-authored-by: Anthony Eid <hello@anthonyeid.me>
Co-authored-by: Cole Miller <cole@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Zed Zippy <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Eid <anthony@zed.dev>
- **title_bar: Extract platform_title_bar from title_bar**
- **file_finder no longer depends on search and agent_servers no longer
depend on language_models**
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Zed Zippy <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Users had trouble signing in due to us relying on the Copilot::global
being set, which was never the case. We've decided to use a dedicated
LSP instance just for handling auth of Copilot Chat and other goodies.
That instance is subscribed to by local Copilot instances for projects.
When the Auth instance changes it's state, local instances are prompted
to re-check their own sign in status.
Closes#47352
Co-authored-by: dino <dinojoaocosta@gmail.com>
Release Notes:
- Fixed authentication issues with Copilot.
---------
Co-authored-by: dino <dinojoaocosta@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Zed Zippy <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
- **settings: Do not leak type serialization into downstream crates**
- **worktree: Separate integration tests into separate target**
Release Notes:
- N/A
- **copilot: Fix double lease panic when signing out**
- **Extract copilot_chat into a separate crate**
- **Do not use re-exports from copilot**
- **Use new SignIn API**
- **Extract copilot_ui out of copilot**
Closes#7501
Release Notes:
- Fixed Copilot providing suggestions from different Zed windows.
- Copilot edit predictions now support jumping to unresolved
diagnostics.
Benchmarks that depend on remote server would not rebuild the remote
server binary outside of dev builds. Let dependants of remote opt into
building the binary even in release builds.
Release Notes:
- N/A
- **search: Make search cancellation more responsive (again)**
- **Fix project benchmarks build**
- **Less scoping and lifetimes for workers**
Related to #45300
Release Notes:
- Project search will consume less resources immediately after
cancellation.
---------
Co-authored-by: Max Brunsfeld <max@zed.dev>
Closes#42268
We've migrated user selections when a given workspace has a single
worktree (as then we could determine what the target worktree is).
Release Notes:
- python: Fixed selected virtual environments not being
persisted/deserialized correctly within long-running Zed sessions (where
multiple different projects might've been opened). This is a breaking
change for users of multi-worktree projects - your selected toolchain
for those projects will be reset.
Co-authored-by: Dino <dino@zed.dev>
This PR introduces support for Next Edit Suggestions while doing away
with calling legacy endpoints. In the process we've also removed support
for cycling completions, as NES will give us a single prediction, for
the most part.
Closes#30124
Release Notes:
- Zed now supports Copilot's [Next Edit
Suggestions](https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2025/02/12/next-edit-suggestions).
We called out to `request_on_type_formatting` only in handle_input
function, but newlines are actually handled by editor::Newline action.
Closes#12383
Release Notes:
- Added support for on-type formatting with newlines.
This also applies to `cargo clean` one.
Closes#20873
Release Notes:
- rust: Changed cwd of tasks that spawn a binary target to the root of a
current package (which used to be a directory of the current source
file).
Fixes a bug that led to us unnecessarily restarting a language server
when we were looking at a single file of a given language.
Release Notes:
- Fixed a bug that led to Zed sometimes starting an excessive amount of
language servers
Problem statement: When given a line that contained a lot of matches of
your hyperlink regex of choice (thanks to #40305), we would look for
matches
that intersected with currently hovered point. This is *hella*
expensive, because we would re-walk the whole alacritty grid for each
match. With the repro that Joseph shared, we had to go through 4000 such
matches on each frame render.
Problem solution: We now convert the hovered point into a range within
the line (byte-wise) in order to throw away matches that do not
intersect the
hovered range. This lets us avoid performing the unnecessary conversion
when we know it's never going to yield a match range that intersects the
hovered point.
Release Notes:
- terminal: Fixed performance regression when handling long lines.
---------
Co-authored-by: Dave Waggoner <waggoner.dave@gmail.com>
Evaluate selection now acts as if the text was typed verbatim into the
console.
Closes ##33526
Release Notes:
- debugger: Fixed "evaluate selection" not behaving as if the
highlighted text was not typed verbatim into the console.
Closes#44090
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
Release Notes:
- python: Improved sorting order of toolchains in monorepos with
multiple local virtual environments.
- python: Fixed toolchain selector not having an active toolchain
selected on open.
---------
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Smit <smit@zed.dev>
In project search UI code we were seeing an issue where "Go to next
match" would act up and behave weirdly. It would not wrap at times.
Stuff would be weird, yo. It turned out that match ranges reported by
core project search were sometimes out of sync with the state of the
multi-buffer. As in, the sort order of
`search::ProjectSearch::match_ranges` would not match up with
multi-buffer's sort order. This is ~because multi-buffers maintain their
own sort order.
What happened within project search is that we were skipping straight
from stage 1 (filtering paths) to stage 3 via an internal channel and in
the process we've dropped the channel used to maintain result sorting.
This made is so that, given 2 files to scan:
- project/file1.rs <- not open, has to go through stage2 (FS scan)
- project/file2.rs <- open, goes straight from stage1 (path filtering)
to stage3 (finding all matches) We would report matches for
project/file2.rs first, because we would notice that there's an
existing language::Buffer for it. However, we should wait for
project/file1.rs status to be reported first before we kick off
project/file2.rs
The fix is to use the sorting channel instead of an internal one, as
that keeps the sorting worker "in the loop" about the state of the
world.
Closes#43672
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
Release Notes:
- Fixed "Select next match" in project search results misbehaving when
some of the buffers within the search results were open before search
was ran.
- Fixed project search results being scrolled to the last file active
prior to running the search.
---------
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Smit <smit@zed.dev>
- **release_channel: Do not use prerelease channel for build id**
Prerelease channel specifiers always compare as less than to
non-prerelease, which led to 2 auto-update bugs fixed in
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/pull/43595 and
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/pull/43611.
We'll use a dot-delimited build specifiers in form:
release-channel.build_number.sha1 instead
- **auto_update: Do not display full build metadata in update
notification**
Release Notes:
- N/A
There are 3 factors:
1. The Preview channel endpoint does not propagate versions with build
identifier (which we oh-so-conveniently store in pre-release field of
semver).
2. Preview build, once fetched, sees it's version *with* build
identifier (as that's baked into the binary).
3. Auto update logic treats versions with pre-release version as less
than versions without pre-release version.
This in turn makes any Preview client see itself as versioned like
0.214.4-123-asdf1234455311, whereas the latest version on the endpoint
is 0.214.4. Thus, the endpoint version is always more recent than the
client version, causing an update loop.
The fix is to ignore build identifier when comparing versions of
non-nightly channels. This should still let us introduce changes to
auto-update behavior in minor releases in the future.
Closes#43584
Release Notes:
- (Preview only): Fixed an update loop with latest Preview update.
This reverts #39643, effectively
For the record, @SomeoneToIgnore found it quite cumbersome to scroll
through logs just to see which tests have failed. I kinda see the
argument. At the same time, I wish nextest could do both: it could
aggregate logs of failed tests and then print out the summary.
Release Notes:
- N/A
This led to a problem where we'd have a zombie entries in LSP dropdown
because they were treated as if they originated from an unknown
worktree.
Closes#42077
Release Notes:
- Fixed LSP status list containing zombie entries for LSPs in other
windows
---------
Co-authored-by: HactarCE <6060305+HactarCE@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Kirill Bulatov <kirill@zed.dev>
This is an in-progress work on changing how task scheduler affects
performance of project search. Instead of relying on tasks being
executed at a discretion of the task scheduler, we want to experiment
with having a set of "agents" that prioritize driving in-progress
project search matches to completion over pushing the whole thing to
completion. This should hopefully significantly improve throughput &
latency of project search.
This PR has been reverted previously in #40831.
Release Notes:
- Improved project search performance in local projects.
---------
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <smit@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Smit Barmase <heysmitbarmase@gmail.com>
