Setting a "git config" option at the GitLab server

This [1] stackoverflow answer explains the full detail of what I am attempting, but the piece I am missing is being able to do the equivalent of this command in gitlab:

git config --global merge.ours.driver true

Is there a way I can do this ?

Thanks,
Matt

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/8014154

Hi,

I had read your topic but didn’t know the answer. Luckily a similar question on merge strategies was asked today moving the knowledge along: How to ignore .gitlab-ci.yml file when merging the branches

TL;DR - the setting needs to done on the GitLab server itself, which is discussed in this feature request. I don’t know whether the mentioned workarounds really work. Maybe @Linds or @gitlab-greg can chime in here :slight_smile:

Cheers,
Michael

2 Likes

Hi Michael,

Thank you for your response :slight_smile:

I am not sure the workarounds are usable in my case, but I’ll look in to them in more detail.

It’s good to know there’s a feature request that would solve this.

cheers,matt

1 Like

Good question and great answer @dnsmichi.

I think a combination of Permissions, and Protected branches may help to protect your code from unwanted changes while still granting “force push” capability to certain members. For resolving merge conflicts with a “Use ours” policy, I believe similar results can be achieved using the web IDE’s Resolve conflicts: interactive mode, but this would require a manual review step to resolve each merge conflict.

For a long term solution, I think the feature request that @dnsmichi linked is the best path forward:


I encourage you to contribute to the conversation in the issue comments. We use issues to prioritize work and evaluate demand for new feature requests, and your feedback is valuable.

2 Likes

Hi Greg,

Thanks for the comment and recommendations. We have implemented permissions and protected branches which greatly reduces the possibility of merging files that we don’t want merged.

A manual step to resolve the conflict always has possibility to go wrong (to err is human!), and it seems a automated solution is close to achievable. Hopefully the feature request will make it on to your roadmap soon!

cheers,matt

2 Likes