hasofficial.blogg.se - Sublime merge git failed with exit code 128

Sure enough you can find the stack trace: In this specific case, that happened on AtlassianEvent::thread-2 so you can look for that thread at around the same time in your application logs. Surely enough you can crosscheck that information with your atlassian-bitbucket.log. C:\Program Files\Git\cmd\git.exe update-ref stash-refs/pull-requests/2254/merge 2c7d7f41ab9fdf30233e0fa9e382ffc2ae7de7b9

C:\Program Files\Git\cmd\git.exe clone -no-checkout -shared -b develop D:\Atlassian\Stash\shared\data\repositories\12 D:\Atlassian\Stash\tmp\git\odyssey-work2717632738003455963.git git: resolve effective diff - git: create new merge - git: merge MFS/odyssey refs/heads/ODSY-10155 -> refs/heads/develop C:\Program Files\Git\cmd\git.exe for-each-ref -sort=-objecttype -format=%(objecttype)%02%(refname)%02%(objectname)%02%(*objectname) refs/heads/ refs/tags/ Ref .RefService.resolveRef(Repository,String) Ticket .ThrottleService.acquireTicket(String) Calling merge request check -branch-permissions:vetoingMergeCheck of type. boolean .(Repository,Class,RepositoryHookSettingsCallback) Calling merge request check -repository-hooks:configuredMergeCheck of type. Calling merge request check :mdt-reviewers-merge-check of type .ApprovalsMergeCheck PullRequestMergeability .(InternalMergeRequest) PullRequestMergeability .PullRequestService.canMerge(int,long) In Git's eyes, you've already made commits and resolved conflicts, so there is no reason that should be any different from a normal upstream pull/merge.20:35:07,731 | AtlassianEvent::thread-2 | - | - | -^M If master and the merge commit are ahead of you, then Git will default to fast-forward that. That's why I go through creating a new branch to "redo" a reverted merge.Įdit: (I keep on hotkeying save on this comp) You asked about ff.

If you merge, then revert the merge commit, then try to merge again, Git will think you've already merged the branch, and tell you "Already up-to-date." (despite HEAD having none of the changes you're trying to introduce). It doesn't "undo" a merge/commit, but makes a commit that is the opposite of all the changes. I assumed this is what you were doing.ĭigging a little deeper, revert creates a new commit. If you're behind master, then pull will do a merge.īut if master is already completely merged into the branch you're on, then pull or merge will tell you Already up-to-date.-even if you've done a revert. Hm, I thought you meant revert bad whilst on master. Always inspect your repo before pushing to make sure everything looks right. Merge -squash is worth mentioning if you'd prefer to keep a more linear history, but I would merge normally as a passive-aggressive reminder of how not-to-merge ) Just double-check everything is the way it should be before pushing. If there haven't been many changes to master, you can try marge -strategy-option theirs to just take the merge result from fixup whenever there is a conflict. You will be dealing with merge conflicts both times thanks to having to revert bad.

merge fixup should let you get master back to where it should be.

merge bad^2 should repeat the bad merge now you just gotta get it right.

reset -hard bad^1 should take you to where master was right before the merge.

checkout -b fixup (I like doing things like this on a fixup branch-not 100% necessary but branches are cheap).

To resolve the whole thing, you probably want: Will probably result in a fast-forward, and not get you the changes you want (even with -no-ff).