Allow edit commits without creating pull request

[Diogo Campos]

If you have write access to the repository, it would be interesting to be able to choose to do this edit without generating a pull request (directly to master or other chosen branch)

[Timothy Pettersen]

Part of the reason we don't offer this currently is that creating a new ref for each edit nicely side-steps the problem of conflicts and race-conditions with updating a pre-existing branch.

This would be a very useful feature though, we'll take a look at it for an upcoming release.

[_shawn_]

+1, I would love to be able to make an edit/commit directly without a pull request. It would be especially useful when you need to do a quick fix from a smartphone.

[Greg MacLellan]

Pull requests currently don't work when SVN Mirror is enabled, which means this plugin also doesn't work with SVN Mirror so long as it's creating pull requests.

[ErikR]

Would also like to see the option to just "edit" as github does. Why create pull request if your admin/write permission on it, makes it really messy for quick edits.

[Simon Lieschke]

For someone with commit rights to a repository it defeats the purpose of being able to make a trivial docu edit identified while browsing the source from Stash. Otherwise it comes with the additional noise of the branch merge in the commit history and requiring approval for the pull request (at least according to our repo permissions). As it stands I'd be better off to make the change on my machine and push locally as I already have to do.

[David Cramer]

Similarly (and perhaps this should be a separate request) if you DON'T have write access to the repo, you should be able to click "Publish" and have it create a fork (if necessary), commit on a new branch, and issue a pull request behind the scenes. This is how it works in Github. In that case while you're editing, you see the following message: "You are editing a file in a project you do not have write access to. We are forking this project for you (if one does not yet exist) to write your proposed changes to. Submitting a change to this file will write it to a new branch in your fork so you can send a pull request." That way, less technical users could contribute to things like markdown files without needing to know much about git. For them, the repo would be like a fancy wiki.

Addendum: I've created https://bitbucket.org/atlassian/stash-realtime-editor-plugin/issue/31/automatically-fork-and-create-pull-request

[Mark Johnson]

Great point, David. I hope the Stash team is reading this ticket. I just ran into precisely that scenario this morning. We have non-programmers who need to be able to maintain HTML and .md files, but we don't want to train them in git.

Less technical users might benefit from a less jargonese message; something like, "Since you don't have permission to write to this repository, we can send a request to the repository owners to review and possibly incorporate your proposed changes. Proceed?" That would be a very useful feature. I'm not sure what to do about cleaning up those old forks after merge, though. Programmers will occasionally prune and purge, but others might not.

Actually, Stash could go a step further and incorporate Gollum, or features like it, and the same repo could show up looking like a wiki (for editors) or a Git repo (for developers).

[ErikR]

I recently had a chat with an atlassian representative regarding stash and pointed out this ticket as one of my biggest issues with stash. Lets hope we see something good in the future.

[Majid Davoodi]

I made an editor for stash that allows committing directly to the branch. https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.mohamicorp.stash.plugin.editor-for-stash

[ErikR]

That's nice, too bad its payed. Would have been better if you made a pull request to this one and improved it for everyone. Since you do know at some point Atlassian will pick it up and make it free i suppose. But its good that there is a alternative.

[Jos Krause]

How hard should it be to make this work properly considering it is working for Bitbucket.org without issues? Seems the effort is already done? Is Stash such a pile of legacy crap that it cannot ride the innovation done to Bitbucket?

Also, I agree with Erik-Jan, we have 500 users, so paying 1200 for 1 line of code change seems absurd, but hey, if people are willing to pay for it, kudoz to Majid.

[Mohammed Davoodi]

Hey Jos,

I'd recommend you'd give our plugin a shot, we support a lot of features that this plugin doesn't. We're also bug free and stable.

Here's a list of features that our Editor supports that this real time editor doesn't:

• Committing directly to master.
• Naming the branch you're creating.
• Support for Git hooks
• Quick access to the editor in a pull request so you can quickly fix bugs when you're going through a review.
• Markdown preview
• Support for multiple flavors of markdown, including github flavored markdown.
• Handles branch permissions.
• Data Center compatibility.
• Support for Bitbucket 4.0, and Stash 3.0.

Given all these changes, I think the price we charge for our plugin is justified. We're also providing support when new Bitbucket versions come out. Our developers have worked hard to write all these features, so its simply not "1 line of code change".