Changes I never merged are in master... how?

Question

I branched off master and made some changes, today someone mentioned I had some bad commits and after I checked it turns out some stuff from my branch was in master(not all). I did a bisect and I can see what commit it was but that commit is part of my feature branch, not master.. Somehow it looks like other merges were done with my branch(which is local only)..

The only thing I can think of is Sourcetree for some reason thought I was in master for some of my commits...

How can I further research this?

jmejiaa1986 · Answer

I never pushed this branch, and I asked the person and he said he hasn't pulled any branches and has only been pushing to master... I'll keep an eye out for any similar incidents. I'm not saying I'm not to blame(I probably am)..

Balázs Szakmáry · Answer

OK. The thing you were wrong about is "The somebody else not having access to your branch, your branch being local only." Everybody has a full clone of the repo with all the branches. Once you pushed your changes, somebody got "your" branch from the server and (probably accidentally) merged it to master. Perhaps you could ask the person who made the merge commit why they did that.

jmejiaa1986 · Answer

Yea, I know it's what it is showing... But the green branch only ever has commits from me and it's separate from master. Only this merge is coming into master, and it's from someone that doesn't have any other commits in it.

If I would have committed to master, I would see the commit in master and then me continuing in the green branch, but that's not the case. The green branch continues with only my feature commits..

I didn't merge into master, until a lot further up.. the only merge into master is int he picture, from a user with nothing else in that branch.

I know it doesn't sound right, which is why I'm so confused.. What else can I do to look into it?