Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects

Support merge=union from .gitattributes when evaluating merge conflicts

    • Closed Issue created by Connor Shea @connorshea

    We are apparently the only ones with this problem, because I can't find much information about this kind of thing anywhere but this blog post. The solution of using merge=union is good for merging manually, but GitLab's interface doesn't support it/take it into consideration.

    This is something others want as well.

    I've recently had this problem, where I created a few small MRs, @rymai asked me to add CHANGELOG entries to each of them, set them to merge after build success, and I came back an hour later to find that all of them now had merge conflict warnings.

    This makes contributing smaller fixes/changes a pretty big pain (and is also an argument against entries for every minor change). Is there any way we can fix this in GitLab itself?

    I'm imagining something like this:

    • There's a merge conflict that only effects the CHANGELOG file, which is listed by .gitattributes as being mergeable with the union strategy.
    • A project owner who has the ability to merge MRs into master would be shown "There are merge conflicts in CHANGELOG, would you like to view what the file will look like after merging?"
    • The diff of the file after the conflict is resolved would be shown to the user.
    • The user is given the option to either Continue or Cancel. If they choose Continue, the MR would be merged, otherwise nothing happens.

    cc: @rspeicher @rymai @dzaporozhets @DouweM

    Designs

      Child items ...

      2. Activity

      Please register or sign in to reply