Sublime Forum

Merge comments keep previous edit comments

#1

I using system GIT (lastest version).

I encounter a troublesome problem during a certain merge: I find the comment not of the merge but of the last operation.

For example, I correct a file that I commit with a specific comment, we find it instead of the commit concerning the merge.

This was observed almost systematically when merging from the daughter branch to the origin branch.

I suspected that the merge comment was empty and repeated the comment from the previous line.

I had to use tortoise GIT to verify that I had not directly made a modification in the origin branch.

Is this a case identified with you?

0 Likes
#2

Hi @alphacentauris,

Sorry to hear you’re experiencing issues with Sublime Merge.

I’m having a little trouble understanding the exact issue occurring - would you mind sharing some steps to reproduce the issue within Sublime Merge?

Additionally, could you confirm which version of Sublime Merge you are using, and what platform you are on?

Kind regards,
- Dylan

1 Like
#3

Hello,

I using Sublime Merge build 2039, with Git 64 bits 2.30.1, on Windows 10 Enterprise x64 edition 20H2 build 804, language fr-fr.

The rule of the Workflow is to create a branch from the parent branch, here integration, alias origin.

In the daughter branch, more or less often an integration merge is carried out in order to integrate all the modifications that have occurred as well as to settle potential conflicts.

On final delivery, this merge must be carried out if not yet carried out.

It is only after that that one can proceed to merge to integration.

The teams whose environment checks the proper functioning of these procedures, in particular based on the text of the operation, which should start with merge …

If this is not the case, it means that we worked directly on the integration branch, in defiance of any procedure :frowning:

This is what was detected by this team … and that I had not seen while looking at the merges.

I need to make multiple branches to try and reproduce the issue I reported, as it wouldn’t make sense for me to attempt it on our main branch.

0 Likes
#4

In this example, the X3-23339-GESADS branch has been merged, you can see it on the part highlighted in green, knowing that the parts which are in Belgian and prefixed “origin / *” allow to visualize for sure the merges .

And as you can see, I don’t have the correct comment once again, but the one from the previous operation, which we don’t see but which is “merged” with the merge.

image
image.png3048Ă—1883 398 KB

0 Likes
#5

Under Sublime merge :

image
image.png1679Ă—1286 137 KB

0 Likes
#6

Under GitHub ( I have merged two windows) :

image
image.png931Ă—2434 245 KB

0 Likes
#7

Hi @alphacentauris,

Thank you for sharing the additional information - much appreciated.

Here is my understanding of the workflow so far:

  1. You create feature branches based off the integration branch
  2. You periodically merge in the integration branch into the feature branch to ensure the feature branch stays up to date.
  3. Finally when the branch is complete, you’ll merge the feature branch into the integration branch

Does this sound correct to you?

In terms of the actual issue you are experiencing, I will need some further clarification. When you say “comment”, are you referring to the commit message, or an actual code comment inside one of the modified files?

Is the issue that when you merge the feature branch into the integration branch, you are getting unexpected changes to one of the files? (i.e. a code comment in the file gets changed unexpectedly?)

Thanks,
- Dylan

0 Likes
#8

Hello Dylan,

This is the update method that we apply.

I did plan a more in-depth set of tests to find the source of this problem.

I took an example which was not too long to follow, but indeed, the text “how” refers to the update of the comments in the source, because, it is well known, either one puts some which are up to date, either we remove it, we do not do things by halves;)

The wording here was “how”, but it can vary: we sometimes find the one in the line below if we examine it with other tools.

Regard,

0 Likes
#9

Hello Dylan,

I noticed a curious thing, which may be normal for sublime merges, but not too much for us: namely, we can do “empty” merges.

We see this when the parent branch that we are trying to merge does not need to be integrated since our branch is up to date on this side.

As you can see in the screenshots, I do a lot of merge to keep the development branch up to date.

When I am with sublime merge, I notice this little “problem”, there is after all only a comment on the destination branch that has been added to it.

I am continuing my investigation for the rest.

Regards,

0 Likes
#10

Hello Dylan,

Sorry I couldn’t reconnect earlier.

I took a long time to see the origin of the merge problem, and I still haven’t come to any conclusion except one finding: Sublime Merge is not necessarily the cause.

Indeed, I also found that some automated tasks using Jenkins also had this problem, and as I am the only one who uses Sublime Merge (at home) …

So I envision that the origin could come from Git itself, maybe even from a particular version, I would see that if I can revisit that in passing later.

As an aside, I noticed some artifacts on the current version of Sublime merge: some toolstips at times remain desperately open and inactive.

It’s just a little annoying, at worst, I raise.

I’m not sure where the origin is, is it when I switch to Sublime Merge screen or not? I don’t think that’s who is playing, but I’ll point it out just in case: each screen has a separate resolution because I’m using a laptop with a pop-up screen. The effect is not necessarily immediate but at one of the next tooltips.

I switch Sublime with the keyboard combination Shift + Windows + Arrow Left / Right.

Regards,

0 Likes