Rulesets that allow only squash merging is not honored, have to set repo wide?

[ptr727]

Select Topic Area

Question

Body

I have configured rulesets on my primary permanent branches to allow only squash merges, but when I merge PR's to these protected branches, any merge option can be used.

I configure branch rules as:

• Require a pull request before merging
• Dismiss stale pull request approvals when new commits are pushed
• Allowed merge methods : Squash

This is not working.
I have to change my repo wide settings:

• Pull Requests : Allow squash merging

And then the PR's honor the repo wide settings.

How do I get rulesets to enforce merge rules for specific branches only?

[markjkaem]

Select Topic Area

Question

Body

I have configured rulesets on my primary permanent branches to allow only squash merges, but when I merge PR's to these protected branches, any merge option can be used.

I configure branch rules as:

• Require a pull request before merging
• Dismiss stale pull request approvals when new commits are pushed
• Allowed merge methods : Squash

This is not working. I have to change my repo wide settings:

• Pull Requests : Allow squash merging

And then the PR's honor the repo wide settings.

How do I get rulesets to enforce merge rules for specific branches only?

Rulesets merge method restrictions only work when all merge types are enabled in repo settings. The repo-wide settings act as the master switch, rulesets can only restrict further from there.
So enable all merge types in repo settings, then use rulesets to limit specific branches to squash only. Thats the intended workflow.

[ptr727]

Ok, I made the change to allow all merge types in general settings, and kept the squash only in rulesets, does not appear to work.

[markjkaem]

Ok, I made the change to allow all merge types in general settings, and kept the squash only in rulesets, does not appear to work.

Weird, that should work. Double check the ruleset is targeting the correct branch pattern and is actually enabled. Also make sure theres no other ruleset or branch protection rule overriding it.
Try creating a test PR to one of those branches and see if the merge options dropdown changes. Sometimes it takes a few minutes to apply.
If still not working it might be a bug, check if youre on a free plan since some ruleset features are only available on team/enterprise.

[ptr727]

This was tested with a new test PR, there is only 1 ruleset that targets two branches, I can see branch rules are active when I view branches.
The screenshots are from github web ui and vscode github extension pr ui.

[evilenx]

Rulesets don't enforce squash-only per branch. Repo-wide "Allow squash merging" wins. Sucks, but true.

*Hack it*

• Linear history kills merge commits. Forces squash/rebase.
• Merge queues: one method per queue.

No per-branch merge control. GitHub half-assed it.

[ptr727]

So if I read what you are saying right, the feature does not work, i.e. if I enable all merge types repo wide then that overrides branch rules, and if I set branch rules the repo wide settings override branch rules?

[github-actions[bot]]

🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒

This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions:

1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as out of date at the bottom of the page.

2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own.

3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution.

Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Question label. To learn more, see our recent announcement.

Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬

[DavidAmyot]

We're having the same issue. The feature is quite a bit misleading. I'd expect that if in the general settings we allow all kind of merge types but then in a ruleset we target a branch and allow only squash merge method, it would then allow only squash merge method.

As said by the OP, the only way to actually force this was to enable only squash merge method in the general settings of the repo, but this also forces it for the other branches which is counter-intuitive of the feature's goal.

I have a hard time believing we're the only ones with this issue?

Exemple screenshots

---

[PostoFisso]

Rulesets currently do not override repository‑level merge method settings. Even if your ruleset specifies “Allowed merge methods: Squash”, GitHub will still follow the repo‑wide merge options unless those options are also restricted at the repository level.

That’s why your protected branches still show all merge types until you disable them globally.

To enforce merge rules on specific branches only, you must:

Disable the unwanted merge methods in Repository Settings → Pull Requests

Then use rulesets to further restrict behavior on selected branches

At the moment, rulesets cannot independently enforce merge‑method restrictions unless the repo‑wide settings already match those restrictions. This is a limitation of how GitHub prioritizes merge settings. 😄

[hardikkaurani]

Hi!

This behavior is expected based on how GitHub currently prioritizes merge settings.

Repository-level merge settings act as the “source of truth”, and rulesets can only restrict options that are already enabled at the repo level. They cannot fully override or enforce a merge method independently.

So even if your ruleset says “Squash only”, GitHub will still show other merge options if they are enabled in the repository settings.

To make it work as closely as possible:

1. Enable all merge methods in repository settings
2. Use rulesets to restrict specific branches to squash
3. Double-check that the ruleset is correctly applied and active on the target branches

However, in practice, this feature can be inconsistent and may not strictly enforce squash-only behavior per branch. This is a known limitation and has been reported by multiple users.

If strict control is required, the only reliable approach right now is to configure merge methods at the repository level, even though it affects all branches.

Hope this clarifies things 👍

[github-actions[bot]]

🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒

This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions:

1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as out of date at the bottom of the page.

2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own.

3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution.

Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Question label. To learn more, see our recent announcement.

Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬

[Tejas-h-blitz]

This is a known GitHub limitation. Rulesets cannot independently enforce merge methods — they can only restrict further from what's already allowed at the repository level.
The correct workflow:

Go to Repository Settings → General → Pull Requests
Enable all three merge methods (merge commit, squash, rebase)
Then in your Ruleset, set Allowed merge methods: Squash only

This should restrict squash-only on the targeted branches while keeping other branches unrestricted.
If it's still not working after that, check:

The ruleset is enabled (not in draft mode)
The branch pattern matches correctly (e.g. main not refs/heads/main depending on your setup)
No conflicting classic branch protection rule is overriding the ruleset

Note: Per-branch merge method enforcement via rulesets is not available on the Free plan — it requires Team or Enterprise. That may be the root cause here.

[github-actions[bot]]

🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒

This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions:

1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as out of date at the bottom of the page.

2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own.

3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution.

Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Question label. To learn more, see our recent announcement.

Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬