It seems to be prevented by default for clear reasons, but we require this for what I believe to be a common scenario:
Enabling a workflow described above requires two things from Stash:
The "downside" would be that the author of a PR would always need to approve the branch, despite the branch containing commits from a single author. This is really just a minor annoyance, though, as it solves a much bigger problem.
I'm having hard time with Pull Request created by me not allowing to set me as a reviewer.
An employee of mine screwed up a branch for a small feature, so I created another one and cherry-picked the proper commits.
I declined the pull request from the previous branch and now I want to create a new pull request with me as the reviewer and hoping to edit the original implementor to be owner of the pull request. Too bad if this is not possible because now I have to message him and manage it tomorrow.
I don't see any point limiting functionality of the Bitbucket artificially like this, it just doesn't make any sense.
There is no way to set the author to be one of the reviewers. If you really want to achieve what you described, the only way to do it is to have a third user create the PR (and probably unwatch it immediately) and set the two authors to be the reviewers.
That said, I do not agree with you on your third point. If two people collaborate on a feature, it really should be reviewed by a third person who did not write any of the code and comes with a fresh pair of eyes.
And we are still only talking about the person who created the PR, *not* the person/people who authored the code. The current restriction is merely a "suggestion" and doesn't enforce anything. It just makes life harder for other workflows. Hence the restriction should be optional. A nice additional option would be to prevent commit authors from approving the PR.
I agree that this the pull request system should be workflow-agnostic. I am in a similar situation where MANY people have contributed on a branch, so now we want everyone to review the branch holistically before it is merged back to the main branch. Having Bitbucket try to guess how others will design their workflow for their needs is highly problematic. It isn't for Bitbucket or Atlassian to decide what is appropriate.
In short, the person who submits the PR is not necessarily the person that authored the code!
As a project manager, I have discovered that different developers want to bring their previous branching method with them when they join the team. Some developers are used to performing individual wo...
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!Find a group
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!
Unfortunately there are no AUG chapters near you at the moment.Start an AUG
You're one step closer to meeting fellow Atlassian users at your local meet up. Learn more about AUGs