Normally the pipeline is triggered by push. There is the possibility to configure an 'on pull request' webhook, but how to connect it with a pipeline and disable or reconfigure the default 'Pipelines' webhook which triggers on push?
This has since been implemented as a feature configurable in bitbucket-pipelines.yml: https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/configure-bitbucket-pipelines-yml-792298910.html#Configurebitbucket-pipelines.yml-ci_pull-requests
No; it will be triggered when a PR is created or updated (the source branch of the PR is pushed to).
When it is merged, the relevant pipelines on the target branch will run, if they are configured.
For example, I configured my pipelines to run tests on pull requests, and on the master branch. So when I merge a pull request to master, the tests run on master because of the configuration of master, not because of the configuration of the pull requests.
Hi Brian, there's any way to have the source and destination branch?
In branch' triggered pull requests I have the BITBUCKET_BRANCH that allow me to execute some script in order to run some code, but not in PR triggered pipelines.
Edit: with this line you can have the origin branch
export BRANCH=$(git branch | grep \* | cut -d ' ' -f2)
Thank you. This is _very_ important for me. I run a team of 3 developers and contractors that float in-and-out. We manage a dozen repos and quality-checking is a big issue for us. In addition to manual code-reviews, making sure all tests run as the PR is created or updated is one less step I need to take.
@Brian_Maissy In the documentation it reads "When it's triggered, we'll merge the destination branch into your working branch before it runs. If the merge fails we will stop the pipeline."
So is my understanding (below) correct:
If this is indeed the case, how do I execute steps on merge failure?
Is after-script applicable here?
Yeah, I would love this feature. The ideal workflow in my mind is to have the build pass as a requirement before merging the Pull Request. This keeps your deployment branches clean. After the PR is merged, the current feature set is nice to watch master/development branches and deploy them as changes are made (ie PRs are merged).
Actually, never mind that - a search reveals no current issue open on the subject, so I created one:
please vote it if you'd like this feature.
So the idea here is that instead of running your pipeline on every push you run it on every PR creation?
Is it not more convenient to build and test your code ASAP?
Update: I have funnelled the feedback about the expense of up to date deploys back to the Bitbucket Pipelines team.
Exactly @Jan Steinke. Developers on any team should be encouraged to push their branches to remote often, even before raising a PR, without worrying about consuming build minutes on unnecessary builds. They can add [skip ci] to commit messages, but will often forget to do so.
Build everything = $$. Plus there may be times where I only want to perform certain actions on a PR but not a typical feature branch push. For example, when Joe is checking in code to remote feature branch for the weekend, I don't necessarily want to burn build time running static code analysis on incomplete code, but on a PR, I absolutely do.
At the moment it is not possible to trigger a pipeline on a pull request being created. However, pipelines run on the source branch will be displayed along with the pull request. If this is something you would like in the product please create a feature request at https://bitbucket.org/site/master/ telling us what you'd like in this feature.
I needed to trigger bitbucket pipeline for every created pull requests. As this is not available by default, I've managed to do it with a simple zapier zap, here is the tutorial :
Is it possible to rerun the pipeline of the merge when the pull-request is updated? We want to require at least two successful builds without failed builds. One for the last commit itself, and one for the potential merge.
What I've observed is that a change in the pull request will reset the "successful build counter" and will initiate a new build on the new commit (we have it setup to build on each commit), but will not trigger a new build on the potential merge. Is there currently a way to achieve that?
Nevermind, it seems that I mislabeled the branch that I want this to affect in my yml.
It now works. I can't seem to make it work for a specific branch. Is there a special format?
And none of these work.
It would be, but when we start having to pay for minutes to build, I think I will want this feature too. That way I could setup pipelines to only run tests on the master branch, and if anyone creates a pull request to the master branch, those also get run through pipelines. This might help save some minutes.
I have a Jenkins pipeline to increase the version number of my artifacts automatically, what it does is:
My question is: Is there some way to indicate BitBucket if a Pull Request comes from a particular user (in this case Jenkins) to auto approve immediately or not request any approver to merge?
Hello Community, I’m Anton Genkin, a product manager on the Bitbucket Server and Data Center team and am excited to share that Bitbucket Server 7.0 is now available! It's a platform release, one th...
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!Find an event
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!
Unfortunately there are no Community Events near you at the moment.Host an event
You're one step closer to meeting fellow Atlassian users at your local event. Learn more about Community Events