feat: enable direct exercise replacement without requiring deletion

[codedmind]

What problem does this solve?

Feature Description

Allow users to swap an exercise directly with another exercise inside a workout/plan without having to remove it first and then add the new one.

User Story / Motivation

As a user training at the gym, I often need to adapt my routine on the fly (e.g., equipment is occupied or I need an alternative variation). The current flow requires deleting the exercise and adding a new one, which resets its position and loses preset parameters (like target sets or reps).

Proposed approach

• Add a "Replace" / "Swap" action to the exercise context menu or action buttons.
• Open the exercise picker/search modal upon clicking "Replace".
• Swap the selected item while retaining its relative position (order in the list) and, where applicable, preset sets/reps metadata.

Dependencies

• This doesn't require adding a new dependency

[sgoendoer]

Would LOVE to see this in the app. Often, you find yourself in the gym and your next machine/equipment is blocked by others. You then switch to a similar exercise. A way in the app to swap out exercises on the fly would be great!

[DuarteSantos8]

Half done: during a workout every exercise has ⋯ → Swap exercise since v1.3.3 (keeps the position, takes over the sets). In the routine editor there is still no 'Replace' — only remove + add. Keeping this open for that part.

[xcambar]

Hi @DuarteSantos8 — thanks for the update above, and for the ⋯ → Swap during a workout. That already covers the "machine is taken" case well, so this is only about the routine-editor half you kept open.

One design question on it, which I think is cheap to decide now and expensive to change later: will a slot hold an ordered list, or an unordered set of alternatives?

For the swap case it genuinely doesn't matter — you want a similar exercise, any order will do. For calisthenics it's the whole thing. Bodyweight work progresses by changing the exercise rather than the load, so a slot isn't "row, or something like a row", it's a ladder: vertical row → incline row → horizontal row → wide row → weighted inverted row. Same for the hinge, the dip, the squat, the pull-up. If the list is ordered, that ladder is just data and "which rung am I on" is derivable from history like everything else in the engine. If it isn't, there's nowhere for "what comes next" to live, and adding the ordering afterwards means touching the routine schema again — right after v1.4.0 has already moved it.

To be clear, I'm not asking for automatic progression here. I read progression.js and I saw where you drew the line:

// Out of sets worth adding: more volume is no longer the answer, load or a harder
// variation is — and that is a decision for a person, not a policy.

That's a reasonable call, and honestly the hold you return alongside it already does most of the work — it tells me I've outgrown the rung, which is the part I'd otherwise have to notice myself. I'd just like the ordering to exist so that step stays open, for whoever wants to take it. #223 looks like the natural home for the visible side of it.

So really just the one question: ordered, or not? Happy to sketch what the ladder case would need on top, if that's useful to you.