Merge request strategy: fastforward merge with option to merge (instead of rebase) when conflict arise

Everyone can contribute. Help move this issue forward while earning points, leveling up and collecting rewards.

  • Close this issue

Problem to solve

I'd like my team to use a fast-forward merge-request strategy that uses an 'option to merge' to resolve a non-fastforward situation as opposed to 'option to git rebase'. Some of my rationale for this is mentioned in this article

I suspect that folks might say that I should use "every merge creates a merge commit". This is not acceptable, as most times fast-forward merges are appropriate and should not create extra merge commits when not necessary.

In a nutshell: do fast-forward merges when available, but resolve divergent histories using git merge instead of git rebase.

Intended users

Gitlab project owners. (Setting up Gitlab merge-request to do merge instead of rebase)

User experience goal

Gitlab project owner can setup the merge request to offer a git-merge instead of git-rebase when necessary on a merge-request.

Proposal

Add a new merge request strategy similar to fast-forward-merge that instead of saying When conflicts arise the user is given the option to rebase, says When conflicts arise the user is given the option to merge

Links / references

https://medium.com/@fredrikmorken/why-you-should-stop-using-git-rebase-5552bee4fed1

~feature

Edited Jun 12, 2025 by 🤖 GitLab Bot 🤖
Assignee Loading
Time tracking Loading