Pull request conflicts: Support merge=union
in .gitattributes file
#9288
Replies: 6 comments
-
Please GitHub :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
hope this |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Looks like github is using a bad re-implementation of half of git internally? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
*taps the mic* is anyone even working on the core product at Github anymore? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
+1 for getting at least partial support for We have a whole team running into merge conflicts on PRs daily due this issue. We can avoid the conflicts by doing client-side branch merging (as that respects TL;DR: GitHub PRs ignoring |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For the sake of completion (from the O.G. Isaacs issue tracker):
Originally posted by @glensc in isaacs/github#487 (comment) on Aug 24, 2017 and
Originally posted by @timotheecour in isaacs/github#487 (comment) on Apr 26, 2020 Just so you know... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This is a continuation of isaacs/github#487, as I could not find an existing one.
https://github.com/nix-rust/nix has recently seen a number of PRs which only conflict on a CHANGELOG.md file. This forces PRs to frequently need to be manually rebased. The changelog is marked as
merge=union
in a.gitattributes
file so these rebases are trivial to perform locally, but it can make accepting contributions from external contributors challenging.It would be helpful if GitHub supported this attribute natively, so manual rebases were not required.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions