Automatic Merge is lovely. But if I am using my release/ branches as support branches and doing release from them I will have a commit to up the version number (e.g. 2.1.1 on the release/2.1 branch) because of fix X. So I have 2 commits - I want commit X (the fix) to auto merge down, and commit Y (the version number change) not to (because the other branches are not 2.1.1).
Any way to do this behavior?
I would recommend that you read this, it gives a nice overview of how to deal with this sort of situation.
The short answer is that you need to:
This is pretty close to what I need but I think its going to be a more awkward dance. Using the simple Atlassian flow (not pure git-flow) I think it ends up like this: - I'm on release/v1.2 - I branch to bugfix/foo - I commit Y to bugfix/foo (where Y is e.g. a value change to 1.2.1) - I now have to manually merge bugfix/foo to release/v1.2 (taking the change) - manually merge to the next merge target (e.g. release/v1.3) using "ours" (so that the 1.2.1 is not taken) - return to bugfix/foo - do change X (which is the real bug fix) - use stash to merge bugfix/foo to release/v1.2 (where it will then also automerge to v1.3 and master) Is that right? Its a shame its such an interweave of command line merges and Stash merges.
You generally would only have to manually merge to 1.3 (with the "ours"). This won't catch the merge commit when it gets merged to 1.2 automatically, but assuming there are no conflicts, this'll be an empty commit anyway. I agree it's not ideal. I created https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/STASH-5356 to track ways we could support this in the UI.
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
We're bringing product updates and pro tips on teamwork to ten cities around the world.Save your spot