Codeberg/Community
Codeberg/Community
57
348
Fork 12
Code Issues 384 Activity

PR conflicts handled different to MS GitHub? #2344

New issue
Open
opened 2026-01-28 20:15:09 +01:00 by buhtz · 4 comments
buhtz commented 2026-01-28 20:15:09 +01:00
Copy link

Comment

I wonder if I have made something wrong and/or Forgejo behave different to Microsoft GitHub.

There is a PR with a merge conflict. No problem. I solved the conflict on my local branch and pushed it back. The solved version lives in doc/concept branch. The proof is that you can read "January 2026" in the README.md. But looking in the PRs diff the commit is missing and the "January 2026" does not appear in the README.md.

Any ideas on this?

### Comment I wonder if I have made something wrong and/or Forgejo behave different to Microsoft GitHub. There is a [PR with a merge conflict](https://codeberg.org/buhtz/hyperorg/pulls/186). No problem. I solved the conflict on my local branch and pushed it back. The solved version lives in [doc/concept](https://codeberg.org/buhtz/hyperorg/src/branch/doc/concept) branch. The proof is that you can read "January 2026" in the README.md. But looking in the [PRs diff](https://codeberg.org/buhtz/hyperorg/pulls/186/files) the commit is missing and the "January 2026" does not appear in the README.md. Any ideas on this?
mahlzahn commented 2026-01-28 23:04:43 +01:00
Member
Copy link

Hi, your base branch latest already includes the January 2026 section, and thus, it is not in the diff again. See attached the commits view of both branches.

Hi, your base branch `latest` already includes the `January 2026` section, and thus, it is not in the diff again. See attached the commits view of both branches.
Screenshot_20260128-230113_1_1.png
228 KiB
Screenshot_20260128-230103_1.png
256 KiB
Screenshot_20260128-230113_1_1.png Screenshot_20260128-230103_1.png
mahlzahn commented 2026-01-28 23:37:06 +01:00
Member
Copy link

I think I now understood your point. In the files diff view all files are shown without the merge conflict resolution, still at commit d74d. When you go now into the field for merging you may see
This pull request is broken due to missing fork information.

Workaround: I don't know how that happened, but could you just click on the very top on the Edit button and try to select the branch again? Or create a new PR from the same branch (probably you need to close the existing one first)?

Bug: Forgejo shouldn't link to a branch if the PR is broken.

Question: Did you maybe delete the branch and recreated it again?

I think I now understood your point. In the files diff view all files are shown without the merge conflict resolution, still at commit d74d. When you go now into the field for merging you may see `This pull request is broken due to missing fork information.` Workaround: I don't know how that happened, but could you just click on the very top on the Edit button and try to select the branch again? Or create a new PR from the same branch (probably you need to close the existing one first)? Bug: Forgejo shouldn't link to a branch if the PR is broken. Question: Did you maybe delete the branch and recreated it again?
buhtz commented 2026-01-29 08:29:59 +01:00
Author
Copy link

Hello Robert,
thank you for the reply. So I messed something up, it wasn't Forgejo. 😆

I think I'll play around with a test repo.

Is Forgejo able to handle merge conflicts like Microsoft GitHub does? I mean can it auto-solve if possible? And if not possible does it offer an editor window to solve existing conflicts in the UI?

Regards,
Christian

Hello Robert, thank you for the reply. So I messed something up, it wasn't Forgejo. 😆 I think I'll play around with a test repo. Is Forgejo able to handle merge conflicts like Microsoft GitHub does? I mean can it auto-solve if possible? And if not possible does it offer an editor window to solve existing conflicts in the UI? Regards, Christian
mahlzahn commented 2026-01-29 11:34:48 +01:00
Member
Copy link

Is Forgejo able to handle merge conflicts like Microsoft GitHub does? I mean can it auto-solve if possible?

I don’t know what GH does.

And if not possible does it offer an editor window to solve existing conflicts in the UI?

No, that would be a nice feature, indeed!

> Is Forgejo able to handle merge conflicts like Microsoft GitHub does? I mean can it auto-solve if possible? I don’t know what GH does. > And if not possible does it offer an editor window to solve existing conflicts in the UI? No, that would be a nice feature, indeed!
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels   
accessibility

Reduces accessibility and is thus a "bug" for certain user groups on Codeberg.

  
bug

Something is not working the way it should. Does not concern outages.

  
bug
infrastructure
Errors evidently caused by infrastructure malfunctions or outages

  
Codeberg

This issue involves Codeberg's downstream modifications and settings and/or Codeberg's structures.

  
contributions welcome

Please join the discussion and consider contributing a PR!

  
docs

No bug, but an improvement to the docs or UI description will help

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature

  
infrastructure

Involves changes to the server setups, use `bug/infrastructure` for infrastructure-related user errors.

  
legal

An issue directly involving legal compliance

  
licence / ToS

involving questions about the ToS, especially licencing compliance

  
please chill
we are volunteers
Please consider editing your posts and remember that there is a human on the other side. We get that you are frustrated, but it's harder for us to help you this way.

  
public relations

Things related to Codeberg's external communication

  
question

More information is needed

  
question
user support
This issue contains a clearly stated problem. However, it is not clear whether we have to fix anything on Codeberg's end, but we're helping them fix it and/or find the cause.

  
s/Forgejo

Related to Forgejo. Please also check Forgejo's issue tracker.

  
s/Forgejo/migration

Migration related issues in Forgejo

  
s/Pages

Issues related to the Codeberg Pages feature

  
s/Weblate

Issue is related to the Weblate instance at https://translate.codeberg.org

  
s/Woodpecker

Woodpecker CI related issue

  
security

involves improvements to the sites security

  
service

Add a new service to the Codeberg ecosystem (instead of implementing into Forgejo)

  
upstream

An open issue or pull request to an upstream repository to fix this issue (partially or completely) exists (i.e. Forgejo, Weblate, etc.)

  
wontfix

Codeberg's current set of contributors are not planning to spend time on delegating this issue.

No labels
accessibility
bug
bug
infrastructure
Codeberg
contributions welcome
docs
duplicate
enhancement
infrastructure
legal
licence / ToS
please chill
we are volunteers
public relations
question
question
user support
s/Forgejo
s/Forgejo/migration
s/Pages
s/Weblate
s/Woodpecker
security
service
upstream
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
Codeberg/Community#2344
No description provided.