-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(git): Use local git for conflict detection #12575
feat(git): Use local git for conflict detection #12575
Conversation
Unfortunately, this PR can't be split to separate smaller chunks |
Co-authored-by: Rhys Arkins <rhys@arkins.net>
Ready for review |
…git-based-conflict-detection
…git-based-conflict-detection
Maybe as a first step we do it without caching? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can the branch reuse refactoring be separated to a different PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this LGTM, although it's a pretty big change so we need to keep our eyes open for performance or functional problems afterwards
Stay tuned, I'll double check this locally with all platforms |
Well, I can confirm everything worked with Azure, GitLab and GitHub. Most probaby it's okay for other platforms as well |
Ok, will review tomorrow |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should add caching very soon after this.
Already working on this |
🎉 This PR is included in version 31.50.0 🎉 The release is available on:
Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Changes:
isConflicted
field from platform and worker codegit.isBranchConflicted()
instead of usingisConflicted
Context:
Closes #3866
Documentation (please check one with an [x])
How I've tested my work (please tick one)
I have verified these changes via: