1

We have two “master” branches in a repo, develop for ongoing development and maint for updating a mostly frozen old version of the product. The develop branch is set as the main branch in the repo setttings. Each time I display the maint branch Bitbucket tells me it’s hundreds of commits behind/ahead of develop. Is it possible to configure either git or Bitbucket to explain that maint will never be merged to develop and I am not interested in seeing the differences between them?

This is how the interface looks now:

current screenshot

And this is how I imagine it could look:

desired interface

(Please note that this is not about tracking or not tracking a remote branch. Both maint and develop should be on the remote and I want to track both. I just don’t want the Bitbucket web interface showing me meaningless differences between branches that will never get resolved.)

zoul
  • 102,279
  • 44
  • 260
  • 354
  • Can't you change the "main branch" in the repo settings to something else which you're interested in? – Noufal Ibrahim Nov 07 '17 at 06:31
  • Not really. We do want our main branch to be `develop` (our ongoing master that almost everything compares and eventually merges to), but it makes little sense to compare `maint` to it. – zoul Nov 07 '17 at 06:36
  • Possible duplicate of [How do you stop tracking a remote branch in Git?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3046436/how-do-you-stop-tracking-a-remote-branch-in-git) – 1615903 Nov 07 '17 at 06:41

0 Answers0