My team is using BitBucket for Git repositories. We plan to go live in next two months and what I want to do is to limit so that the pull requests can be only made from a specific branch to the 'production' branch.
I am aware of the Branch Permission sections of the BitBucket but that solves by limiting the 'Changes without a pull request' only half the issue.
What I want to achieve is that there should be no changes allowed without approved pull request and this pull request can only be made from a specific branch.
If the pull request is made from any other 'random' branch to the 'production' branch the pull request could get automatically denied.
Is such a thing possible? Thanks.
Related
I cannot find an option to delete a PR on BitBucket.
Am I overlooking something or it's really not possible?
You can decline a pull request which has the same result -- stopping / removing the PR.
As per the link jonrsharpe mentioned, to the right of the merge button there are 3 dots. Under that menu you should have a delete option if you have permission to delete.
This is available only for BitBucket Server, not on BitBucket.org.
In BitBucket.org there is no option to delete the PR.
For Bitbucket Cloud, there are no way to do this. One way of getting by is to have a 'dev/junk' branch, used for declined or useless pull requests.
Then just edit the existing request to go into this branch and merge.
Data is still there, in case you need it some day, or if it's sensitive info you can remove the whole branch. If its already declined before, well, nothing can be done then other than recreating that repo
See https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BCLOUD-8089 for the update on this feature request and vote on it!
I wanted to delete a pull request of a branch that had already been merged and deleted. Even though I am an admin of my project, I cannot see any "delete" options. For me what worked was to recreate the deleted branch from the main branch and push it. E.g.
git checkout master
git checkout -b [deleted branch name]
git push -u origin [deleted branch name]
Then I opened Bitbucket and the branch showed up as "merged" and disappeared from the PRs list.
You cannot delete the PR in bitbucket.org .
Using Decline option will do exactly what you want - the PR won't be visible in the tab Pull requests (you need to sort PR by Decline to see it) but on tab Branches you will see that in column Pull request you have removed your problematic PR.
PS you cannot undo Decline of PR, so take care
In simple words please,
What is the meaning of "build expired" when creating a pull request?
All answers I found are the same, from microsoft website.
Thank you very much!
What is the meaning of "build expired" when creating a pull request?
"Build Expired" is a feature of branch policies. Set a build expiration to make sure that updates to your protected branch don't break changes in open pull requests.
In short, when the target branch is updated before the pull request is completed, build expiration will be triggered.
For example:
Pull Request: Release -> Master. Master branch have other new changes during the Pull Request Process. It will trigger the Build expiration.
You can set the expiration time according to your needs:
Immediately when branch is updated.
After n hours if branch has been updated
Never
You can navigate to Repos -> Branches -> Branch Policy -> Build validation to check the detailed settings.
Build expired when creating pull request
From you situation, you may have set the first policy: Immediately when branch is updated.
When you see the build expired, this means that the target branch has some new changes.
To solve this issue, you can choose a suitable policy for build expiration.
Here is the doc about branch policy.
I have configured a Jenkins Pipeline that correctly receives webhooks push notifications from GitHub, on push events.
The authentication is done through a deployment key.
Jenkins configuration seems to rely a lot on the concepts of branches and pull requests.
Given my workflow, which consists mostly of creating branches for any needs, and merge changes back onto master once things would look fine on the CI, I do not really care about seeing my builds categorized by branch or PR.
I would prefer to see builds based on commits' hashes. I do not see the need to tell Jenkins what branch I want it to match.
My current configuration is not selecting the commit revision I desire. I do not understand how it decides which branch or commit to build, once it receives a push notification. In Jenkins I have set the branch to **.
Checking the webhook payload, I noticed that it contains both the list of commits but also something called head_commit, with its id property being the commit's hash I want to see being built.
I would like Jenkins to do the following:
Check what's the head commit in the webhook notification (head_commit.id in the payload)
Build that precise commit, no matter the branch it is part of
Setting a green tick or a red cross beside the commit's hash on Github
Is this possible?
We plan to have only admins able to make changes to our repo’s master branch. Developers can clone the repo and then create their own dev branch off of master to work on. When developers feel ready, they can merge their development branch onto the master branch using a pull request. However, they will not be able to merge their dev branch into master until the admins have approved the changes.
On Bitbucket, I set branch permissions as:
+ Write Access: Rachel and Jamie.
+ Merge via pull request: Rachel, Jamie, and team:developers.
+ Merge checks: check for at least 2 approvals.
Next, we had a developer (not Rachel or Jamie) make changes on their own dev branch. They then committed and pushed the changes to their remote dev branch--worked as expected.
Last, they initiated a pull request to merge the remote dev branch into master. A warning that two approvals was needed popped up, but the developer was still able to just click "Merge" and the dev branch merged into the master branch, despite 0 approvals.
I expected that the developer would not be able to merge with 0 approvals. How do I set permissions so that this is the case?
Two things:
You explicitly granted "merge via pull request" access to the developers. They're therefore able to merge pull requests. If you never want them to merge PRs to that branch, then revoke that. (They'll still be able to create PRs, just not merge them.)
You didn't mention whether you've enabled "Prevent a merge with unresolved merge checks", under the premium features.
We've created a plugin to prevent this situation. You can inspect it on marketplace:
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1219882/prevent-merge-when-needs-work
I am running tfs 2015 and have it build when a pull request is create to a certain branch.
It appears that the retention policies are not working on it as they should be only lasting 1 day and they are there for months at a time.
I think the problem is the source branch. on the pull requests builds it has it as the refs/pull/688/merge. The retention policies look for refs/heads/*.
Is this why they are not getting deleted and if so how can I add the pull request builds to get them deleted?
I have tried typing refs/pull/* in the retention but it comes back as refs/head/refs/pull/*
This is due to the refs/pull/688/merge branch was created and only for the build of pull request. However, the normal branch is refer/heads/(master/feature/...). It's not in the branch filters of normal branch. So the build retention has no effect on the pull request build.
For now, you may have to delete the pull request builds manually. You can also add a user voice in this site for this feature request. PM will kindly review it.
It's explained in Microsoft's documentation here. Your Minimum to keep is not zero, so there will always be something kept for the pull requests "branches".
In your case you want to add a new retention policy with 1 for Days to keep 0 for Minimum to keep and refs/pull/* for Branch specification / Branch filters
In 2017 (local, not VSTS) typing /ref/pull/* doesn't work, you end up with +refs/heads//ref/pull/* - the + being the include. Typing refs/pull/* works fine and you get +refs/pull/*