We have two developers using the same ADF. Each developer creates a git branch and starts working on it. Each developer can save the changes to their own git branch but there can only be one collaboration branch and this branch decides the publishing branch. This is causing a blockade (for one of the developer. How can we solve this ?
ADF publish branch can be set using a publish_config.json but now there is an option to set this in the adf itself. which one takes precedence? What is the best practice here?
You need to manage the work of each developer with standard git branch/merge processes. When one dev is done with work in their feature branch, then they will create a pull request to merge changes into your collaboration branch.
If the second dev has not created a feature branch yet, they can just do so after the pull request from the first dev is complete and then continue work from there. If the second dev has already created a feature branch, then they will need to merge the new changes from the collaboration branch into their feature branch to continue work before later committing to git and creating a pull request to merge changes from their feature branch back into the collaboration branch. From there, you can publish as needed.
This git work can be done through the ADF editor as well as through any other git interface you have. It's up to you.
This article discusses the process in specific detail using the ADF editor.
EDIT:
I believe you now have answers for this from 3 of the other 5 questions you posted about this same topic in the past day.
ADF publish confusion in git mode
Azure data factory working-branch confusion
When ADF publish branch is git protected how to publish?
Here is another article which describes the fundamental git process for ADF to help bring you up to speed with the fundamentals of how the different branches work, and how you can switch publish branches on the fly if needed.
So our company is using Gitflow. Can't currently change that. I have looked into github-flow and gitlab-flow, but we can't currently move to a different model.
When finishing a hotfix or release branch, right now we don't use merge requests, but manually use gitflow to locally merge the branches into master/dev/release.
Is there a supposed way of finishing a branch using merge requests in Gitlab? We'd like to go protect the master and dev branches from pushes. It's just safer to let gitlab handle the actual merging.
I'd've opened an issue on gitlab directly, but I'm not actually sure where.
Edit: I also thought about making two Merge Requests in Gitlab, but that can't be the way either.
In git lab, you can create an issue, then within the issue you can create a branch. This branch is linked to the issue (I think because of the issue number at the start of the branch name), such that when you do a merge request on that branch it automatically closes the issue.
So my question is - how can you do this via the API? I can create the issue, but there is no control (as far as I can see) within the issue API to create the related branch.
Is that possible?
It would be nice to be able to create an issue with branch in one go - but I don't think that is possible?
Ok - its not perhaps the best answer, but here is what I came up with for a interim solution (in linux bash):
Raise the issue store response in cmd_resp
Extract the issue ID: echo $cmd_resp | grep -o -P '(?<=iid":).*(?=,"project_id)'.
Where the issue ID is found by looking for: iid":<ISSUE-ID>,"project_id
Create a branch with the name: <ISSUE-ID>-some-branch-name - by having the issue ID at the start of the branch name, gitlab automatically makes a relation to that issue.
So - its quite a simple approach, but it does not feel very integrated. I would still prefer to do that from the point of view of the issue.
It is not possible to create a branch related to an issue via the issues API.
However, this is in line with how RESTful APIs should be designed. If you want to create a branch, you need to make a POST request to the branches API.
POST /projects/:id/repository/branches
As you have already found out, GitLab is quite good at automatically linking issues, MRs and branches together.
For a branch to be linked to an issue, simply start the branch with the issue ID. However, usually it is enough if a merge request is linked to an issue. In my opinion, you shouldn't really be concerned with the branch. You can later access the branch via issue->MR->branch
Merge requests are linked to issues whenever a MR's description text links to an issue (e.g. #1). If you add an issue ID to the Closes statement, the issue will also be closed upon MR resolution.
Therefore, you could simply create a branch via the API, name it however you want. Then, create a MR from that issue and include Closes #1 in your MR description, where 1 is your issue ID.
Further, I would recommend using a more sophisticated REST client. You shouldn't have to parse the issue ID yourself. It is properly set as a field in the JSON response.
When using GitLab's issue tracker, it seems that I cannot mark a specific branch that an issue affects. I'd like to be able to e.g. show only the issues that are related to a specific feature branch. Is there any way to do this?
Short version: In gitlab how do I view all issues resolved in a commit (or merge request) given that I close issues using git comments (e.g. 'fix #10')?
Long version: In case there is an alternative solution what I'm ultimately trying to accomplish is this. Let's say developer fixes 10 issues, commits, creates merge request and deploys to the staging server. Now QA team needs to know the list of issues that were released so that they can test them. I know this can be done by manually labeling each issue(or assigning a milestone). But since gitlab already knows what issues were resolved in a commit it should be easy to view all issues associated with a commit/merge request. Is it possible to view them?