Question about pull-requests

Question about pull-requests

[Nagaraj Mandya]

Hello,
  In our GIT repository, all users are restricted from merging to
master without a pull request. This works well and all developers are
raising pull requests and merging. However, if there is a merge
conflict during the merge, we have a problem.

  We follow the instructions provided by Bitbucket and the final step
is to push the merged code to master to the "origin" repository.
However, that steps always fails with the error that pushes can only
be made with pull requests.

  How do we work around this problem? We want all pushes to happen
through merge requests but still allow pull requests with merge
conflicts to get pushed. Thanks.
--
Regards,
Nagaraj

Re: Question about pull-requests

[Kevin Daudt]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:24:15PM +0530, Nagaraj Mandya wrote:
> Hello,
>   In our GIT repository, all users are restricted from merging to
> master without a pull request. This works well and all developers are
> raising pull requests and merging. However, if there is a merge
> conflict during the merge, we have a problem.
> 
>   We follow the instructions provided by Bitbucket and the final step
> is to push the merged code to master to the "origin" repository.
> However, that steps always fails with the error that pushes can only
> be made with pull requests.
> 
>   How do we work around this problem? We want all pushes to happen
> through merge requests but still allow pull requests with merge
> conflicts to get pushed. Thanks.

The usual way to solve this is to rebase those commits of the pull
requests on the updated master. That allows the one who makes the pull
request to solve the issues, and then push the branch again (adding
--force-with-lease because you've rewritten history). 

This should update the pull request, but now it should be able to be
merged without conflicts.

That way, you are not required to merge locally into master and push
that.

The merge local option will only work if at least someone has rights to
push to master, but that is a bitbucket question, not a git question.

Re: Question about pull-requests

[Jeff King]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:24:15PM +0530, Nagaraj Mandya wrote:

>   In our GIT repository, all users are restricted from merging to
> master without a pull request. This works well and all developers are
> raising pull requests and merging. However, if there is a merge
> conflict during the merge, we have a problem.
> 
>   We follow the instructions provided by Bitbucket and the final step
> is to push the merged code to master to the "origin" repository.
> However, that steps always fails with the error that pushes can only
> be made with pull requests.
> 
>   How do we work around this problem? We want all pushes to happen
> through merge requests but still allow pull requests with merge
> conflicts to get pushed. Thanks.

The strategy we use at GitHub (for our internal work, I mean, but which
we also recommend to other projects on the site) is to back-merge master
to the pull request branch and resolve the conflicts there. Then you can
push that, and the merge of that result to master will always be trivial
(unless somebody updated master in the meantime, of course).

In fact, we use the "protected branches" feature[1] to disallow any
non-fast-forward merges of a pull request into the master branch. We do
our CI tests on the tip commit of each pull request, and they also must
pass to allow merging. So you would not want to do any real merging to
bring the PR into master; the merge result hasn't actually been tested!

I don't know offhand whether BitBucket has a similar feature to
protected branches, but certainly you can do use the back-merge-and-push
trick.

-Peff

[1] https://github.com/blog/2051-protected-branches-and-required-status-checks

Re: Question about pull-requests

[fhaehnel]

From your message I’m guessing you are using Bitbucket Server with branch
permissions [1]. 
We’re aware the conflict resolution instructions can not always be followed.
Improving these is on our backlog
(https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BSERV-7561) - feel free to watch/vote for
that issue. 

First, let’s start with the most basic case: a pull request you created is
conflicted and can’t be merged. 
Here, you can apply Jeff King’s solution and back-merge the target branch.
Alternatively, you can, of course, rebase the branch too. (Check out
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing for more info on
which option to pick and when).

If you are using cascading merges [2] in Bitbucket Server, there’s a chance
of conflicts during the merge-cascade, which will generate “Automatic merge
failures”.
If this happens, Bitbucket will create a new pull request on your behalf.
The same strategy as above can be applied: merge the target branch and
resolve the conflicts, or rebase.


[1]
https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/using-branch-permissions-776639807.html
[2]
https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/automatic-branch-merging-776639993.html

- Felix



--
View this message in context: http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-pull-requests-tp7648649p7648733.html
Sent from the git mailing list archive at Nabble.com.