Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Hotfixes cannot be "published" #92

keithamus opened this Issue Jan 17, 2011 · 32 comments


None yet

While release and feature branches can all be published (git flow release/feature publish), hotfix branches cannot.

In our particular development environment, only senior staff can merge to master, meaning that hotfixes need to be pushed to the central repository by junior staff, so a senior member can pull that hotfix branch and then merge to master (git flow hotfix finish). The problem here is that because hotfixes cannot "publish", pushing a hotfix takes on a completely different mantra to pushing a release/feature branch (I'm telling our junior staff that for hotfixes they have to run git push origin hotfix/1.0.1 as opposed to git flow hotfix publish, which they are used to).

So in summary. Can we get "hotfix publish" added as a command to git flow?

Our team could also benefit from this. We work on a web based application and often need to vet hotfixes in a staging environment. While we can fairly painlessly push the hotfix branch to github, the command would be a great convenience.

simmerz commented Feb 2, 2011

Additional to this, it would be very useful to have the track function added so that published hotfix branches can easily be brought down. This is something my team could very much do with as well. +1

haydn commented Feb 7, 2011

@cranberyxl Exactly the same situation here.

maxs commented Jun 25, 2011

Exactly the same situation, please add such feature!

mtowers commented Jul 13, 2011


pawa commented Aug 19, 2011

Really need this +1

This is definitely needed here. Love git flow, and I've love to see publishable hotfixes. We do this for code reviews.


phoet commented Oct 26, 2011

+2 :)

+1 Trying to use post-receive hooks + CI server to automatically test hotfixes, then deploy from campfire!

haydn commented Nov 13, 2011

Thanks @phoet.

mloskot commented Apr 4, 2013

Given the #163 has been merged, why this issue has not been closed?
Is that because publish hotfix feature has been merged into develop only and not yet released?

zgotts commented Jun 20, 2013

hoping this gets released soon! it'll be a very helpful addition.

This is implemented in my fork git-flow (AVH Edition)
My fork has diverged to much to make this into an easy pull request for nvie's gitflow,

Checkout the changelog for more information about bugfixes and new features implemented in my fork.

kretes commented Dec 12, 2013

waiting for that as well

poffe commented Feb 1, 2014



Is there any development on this subject? I, too, would really like to have this feature, but the lack of input from the repo's author leads me to wonder wether it'll ever happen?

This works for me. Not sure if I misunderstand the issue, but with a relatively recent git flow (installed via apt-get 2 weeks ago on ubuntu 14.04) I can do git flow hotfix publish test after git flow hotfix start test.

Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
To <my repo on github>
 * [new branch]      hotfix/test -> hotfix/test
Already on 'hotfix/test'
Your branch is up-to-date with 'origin/hotfix/test'.

Summary of actions:
- A new remote branch 'hotfix/test' was created
- The local branch 'hotfix/test' was configured to track the remote branch
- You are now on branch 'hotfix/test

@emanuil-tolev because the git-flow installed via apt it's the git-flow (AVH Edition) a @petervanderdoes 's fork, not the @nvie version.


gsaslis commented Nov 28, 2014

++ ;

could definitely use this! Thanks! ;)

+1. Definitely a good idea!

Would be great to have it!

madlew commented Feb 27, 2015

+1 but after 4 years of having this ticket opened it seems there's no hope to have it done

+1 but after 4 years of having this ticket opened it seems there's no hope to have it done

Not had any problems with a year and half of https://github.com/petervanderdoes/gitflow , can recommend that fork.

gsaslis commented Mar 3, 2015

Ok, thanks @emanuil-tolev - will give that a try! ; )

@keithamus keithamus closed this Jan 22, 2016

gsaslis commented Jan 22, 2016

@keithamus does 'closed' mean 'wontfix' ?

Hey @gsaslis; I filed the issue back in 2011. I don't have any ownership of this repo. Closed means I'm no longer interested in this issue personally, and I want to clean up my issues page as it is my todo list. If you're interested in this you should maybe file the issue again?

gsaslis commented Jan 22, 2016

@keithamus oh, ok, sorry about the confusion there... : )
I guess the best solution is still that fork then, since this is now closed

@gsaslis np. I'd say yes - looks like the fork might be the way to go. There's been no activity on this repo for years.

JRigotti commented May 10, 2017 edited

This is an old thread, but I came here looking for the same solution. This repo is unchanged in 5 years and it looks like it will continue like this, I strongly suggest you to use the AVH fork, since it provides more options including git flow hotfix publish.

If you installed git-flow using brew, you can simply change it with

$ brew uninstall git-flow
$ brew install git-flow-avh
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment