Improved pull request merge experience feedback

[willsmythe]

Important

The new experience is now generally available 🎉

Thank you ❤️ for all the feedback and interaction since the public preview launched in November! We're still tracking some a small set of issues and enhancements we want to make. See Known issues below.

About the new experience

This update is designed to help you better understand the state of your pull request and get it merged faster.

This experience supports all the usual ways of merging: direct, bypass and merge, auto-merge, and merge queue, and works with rulesets to ensure pull requests meet all the requirements to merge.

What's new

The new experience is designed to feel familiar, but also improves on the previous experience. Here are some highlights:

• Checks grouped by status: checks are now grouped by status with failing checks prioritized at the top of the list, making it easier to identify problems that need attention
• Checks ordered logically: status checks are now ordered using natural ordering to make it easier to find a specific check, especially when the list gets long
• Improved rule enforcement: errors resulting from failing commit metadata rules (like invalid commit messages) are now reported at the point of merging so they can be corrected
• Improved accessibility: consistent keyboard navigation, focus management, and landmarks help make the experience more accessible to everyone

🔴 🔴 🔴 Known issues 🔴 🔴 🔴

You will run into some bugs and missing features (let us know when you do if not listed here).

Bugs

• Started 1s ago status sporadically updates itself
• Long status check names/descriptions get truncated

Feature gaps

• Add your review action in the Reviewers section (the button on the classic experience simply navigates to the Files Changed page)
• Section showing when there are unresolved conversations blocking merge

Enhancements under consideration

• User preference to disable grouping checks by status
• Button to re-run a failed Actions workflow job (and its dependents)
• Softening the status presented in the reviews/approval section

Recently fixed

Full list

• FIXED 2024-11-09: Enabling auto-merge fails with a "not found" error
• FIXED 2024-11-12: Admin bypass checkbox not always appearing preventing users from bypassing merge requirements
• FIXED 2024-11-14: Styling of the Delete branch button is sometimes missing (fixed by reloading the page)
• FIXED 2024-11-22: The browser tab icon (favicon) does not currently reflect the pull request's merge status
• FIXED 2024-11-25: A page refresh is sometimes required to show latest status and correct actions/buttons (like after all checks have completed)
• FIXED 2024-11-25: Clicking Delete branch / Restore branch fails with a Couldn't update branch message (likely occurs only in PRs from forks)
• SUPPORTED: Reviews can be dismissed and re-requested
• SUPPORTED: Command line instructions are missing
• FIXEX: Restore branch button is easily confused for Delete branch (we moved the Restore branch button out of the new merge experience so the only button that will appear here is Delete branch)
• FIXED: Use natural/logical ordering for status checks to help with numeric matrix build ordering
• FIXED: In certain cases, an incorrect commit author email address will be shown when confirming merge or a different email address will be used from what's displayed
• FIXED: Misalignment/wonkiness with check status icon (Safari-only)
• FIXED: Squash and auto-mergebutton (to enable auto-merge) is too easily confused forSquash and merge` (to directly merge) because of similar text and styling *FIX IN PROGRESS
• SUPPORTED: Selecting a different commit author email when merging
• FIXED: Showing status check durations (showing how long a check has been running / took to run)

Feedback

We want to hear from you! Post your comments, questions, likes, and dislikes below.

[codeithuman]

Where is the "Merge without waiting for requirements to be met (bypass branch protections)" checkbox?

Old

New

[otskarli]

This is amazing

[fabiomontefuscoloprotolabs]

Isn't possible to have an option to always show the checks, with no inner scroll, like a normal page?? I don't understand why it needs to be hidden

[RichoKD]

Is it just me or do the check animations use a lot of gpu power?

[nielsnl68]

It looks very perfect, when we could see this box on top of the page instead of at the bottom.

[wsmith323-cube]

The titles of the collapsable sections in the new Merge UI are not selectable. I use some of these in conjunction with a browser plugin to monitor when an automatic build is finished. Having to type the text into that tool is arduous and error prone. It didn't used to be this way. Why is it now?

[willsmythe]

Thanks for the feedback / write-up. Definitely agree. This check box appears for some users in some scenarios, but there's clearly a bug here where it's not appearing for everyone. We're investigating.

[seesharprun]

I like this feature so far, but the only transient bug I've seen is sometimes the checks show up fine while they are processing, but once all checks have passed, they all disappear. If you select the arrow to expand, it shows an empty list. I need to refresh the browser to see the passing checks.

Again, just a small client-side issue that I'm seeing in Edge 130.0.2849.68

[willsmythe]

Thanks for reporting. If you (or anyone else) is able (and comfortable) to capture a quick video and include here as a reply, please do!

If you select the arrow to expand

Are you referring to the caret 1) on the right side of the merge box, or 2) next to "X successful checks"?

[willsmythe]

I added this issue to the Known issues > Bugs section in the description above. Check there for updates, and to see other issues we're tracking.

[chamini2]

Again, just a small client-side issue that I'm seeing in Edge 130.0.2849.68

for a second I thought you commented your IP

[jessicaDura]

again non diversitalizing materials the only truely honest traite available to be earned.

[dub-lin]

just hoping for the best cus my time has been wasted looking for a way out of everything i put myself into just to find a better living

[thomas-bc]

The "view command line instructions" can be handy. It used to be a clickable element that extends to show CLI commands. It is not anymore. Could be good to add back in?

[willsmythe]

Thanks for the feedback. This is coming! See the Known issues > Feature gaps list above.

[Tilka]

The second command of Step 1 points to the wrong repository. It should point to the repo of the branch being merged, not the repo of the branch it's being merged into. The instructions of the "classic merge experience" are correct.

[jimklimov]

@mno-ly : surprisingly, yes. I see a fair share of samaritan contributors who are helping improve FOSS projects, even if they are young and making first steps with the language or git tooling, so helping them help us is good.

A perhaps more "troublesome" category is contributors who are very much not young, and while they can share experience about the project or subject matter generally, and are comfortable about programming or documentation tools, learning new-fangled tools like git (and remembering it until the next time) is a practical problem, so cheat-sheets do help. May I live to their age and remain so eager and able to help!

[tzing]

The new look on that PR successfully merged message confused me.

Its appearance is quite similar to the message of you can click this button to delete the branch on the classic pane. This look makes me wonder if the auto delete branch feature is broken.

[DingGGu]

I think this feedback is deployed now.

[richardhj]

@willsmythe It shows "...has been merged and deleted" (see above) to me but my branch is protected (and if it would have been deleted in fact, it would be a disaster because of deployment).

[jonathan-bird]

@richardhj +1 here too

[freakyblack]

Has there been any consideration to redesign or clarify the 'PR successfully merged and closed' message to avoid confusion with the auto-delete branch feature?

[isabellabreder]

+1 here, very confusing

[kaoths]

---

The "Delete branch" button CSS/style sometimes doesn't load.
This sometimes appears after merging a PR.
It does not affect any functionalities. Just the visual issue, reloading the page fixes it.

[tarilabs]

Same problem, google chrome on Mac

[a-stankevich]

Same happens occasionally in Firefox, Windows

[kaoths]

Sorry for late reply, I'm seeing this on Arc browser.

[willsmythe]

This should be resolved now. If anyone is still experiencing this, let us know!

[Ivnfrolov13]

yes

[getchoo]

Here is the new experience on a PR with an approval from a reviewer without write access, that has also passed all CI:

Displaying red around this feels a bit odd to me. My first thought when I see it is that CI has failed, changes have been requested, or maybe that there are required approvals/checks still being waited on? (None of these are the case in this repository, which is nixpkgs)

In comparison, the classic merge experience has a green accent:

(I also noticed the new experience shows the approval of the reviewer w/o write access. This is an awesome addition for nixpkgs, so thanks!)

The use of green lets a PR author or committer know at a glance that it should be good to merge. I'd much rather keep this behavior :)

[maples3]

As a side note, I really dislike that the passed checks are hidden, and that if I expand the successful checks, that it doesn't stay expanded on refresh or if I come back.

Sometimes GitHub doesn't run the actions for whatever reason, or it's delayed, so seeing a blank/empty box here is an internal red flag for me, whereas if all is well I expect to see a line-up of green checkmarks

[pawelma]

I also think that It shouldn't be red when there are no requested changes from the reviewers, red implies that action from author is required, but waiting for review is not an action for the author but something that reviewer should look at. As a reviewer I skipped couple PRs after this feature has been applied as I immediately assumed it's WIP and CI is failing.

[patrickherrera]

+1 on changing the use of a red colour (and the big red cross icon) even if there are no issues. This is not very user-friendly and disguises real problems. Amber/orange makes more sense, and maybe a "paused" icon instead of a cross if the only thing needed is a review

[zsojma]

+1 for not using red

[janbrasna]

As a contributor, I probably shouldn't be told (in red) that "merging is blocked" — that's not an error given my access and does not warrant the grey triangle or the red box treatment — when it just waits for someone with write access. Basically the disabled greyed-out merge button with the text "Only those with write access…" on the last line do the job of communicating I have to wait for someone to merge that. The warning above it just adds more confusion than anything else.

[asilbek-ismoilov]

Very good

[halamix2]

"Enable auto-merge" button is replaced with "Squash and auto-merge" which is broken:
Instead of marking the PR to be auto-merged it simply displays "Not Found" error below the button

Console logs just displays 404 on POST to https://github.com/<org>/<repo>/pull/531/page_data/enable_auto_merge

[willsmythe]

The team is reviewing a fix for this.

[willsmythe]

A fix for this problem rolled out on Friday! 🎉

Let us know if you're still seeing this problem.

[halamix2]

It's fixed now, thanks <3

[jfredt]

What steps were taken by the development team to address the problem, and how long did it take to deploy a fix?

[stevemayhew]

Also, would be nice to bring back showing the other options (Merge commit, etc.) that may be disabled by the repository owner. That way you know what to ask for if your preference is missing

[leoskyrocker]

it's buggy and requires a page refresh before the merge button works even when all the checks are already passing, overall it feels less real time than before

[willsmythe]

Thanks for the feedback. Definitely a problem. We're investigating.

[willsmythe]

Are there any required status checks? Or just optional? Or a mix?

[dg6862]

I have the same issue. We have several optional checks and one required.

[willsmythe]

A fix is underway for this. Should deploy by early next week.

[jcviljoen]

Hey Will 👋. I ran into a simpler case where, if you merge the base branch and the checks pass, the "enable auto merge" button stays visible until you refresh. Seemed like an extension to this feedback 🙌.

Great update btw! 🚀

[Lamparter]

Merge is not an allowed merge method in this repository.
You're not authorized to push to this branch. Visit https://docs.github.com/repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/managing-protected-branches/about-protected-branches for more information.

files-community/Files#16445

Sorry for the oversized screenshot! I noticed the text merge is not an allowed merge method in this repository in a repository I don't control - I'm assuming this isn't intended and so reporting it here.

[banagale]

I just spun wheels trying to determine if I had set up my PR incorrectly, only to switch to classic merge experience and see that nothing seems to be wrong.

This language makes no sense.

[InvalidUsernameException]

Yeah, this one is weird. I'm seeing something similar on a PR that I opened on a repo for which I do not have write access. And contrary to the message the branch in question does not contain a merge-commit.

[dogshapedangel]

Ran into the same issue and spent way too much time thinking I did something wrong here when submitting a PR. The language is extremely confusing and misleading and should be adjusted.

[timshadel]

This is especially invalid if there is only 1 commit—squashing is not possible at that point.

[janbrasna]

If I don't have write access, I can't influence anything about merge strategies or branch protections. Please don't show it to me, when I won't be even shown the merge button…

(BTW aren't the first and the last issue effectively the same? Isn't it redundant if/when they are covered by the other?)

Also, don't make up issues. None of the PRs I've documented here would have a merge commit present:

so this is clearly making up stuff.

The only issue is an approval missing. That's already covered on the first line. The last line is completely irrelevant to me, when I don't have the merge button privileges. It adds no value, only misinformation. If the whole line was gone, it would actually be more helpful. (Of course for members or write level folks that's a different story, but it's absolutely non-actionable for read access people.)

[kennytv]

I like that the list of checks is grouped collapsed now, though when expanding it, I'd want all of them to be opened by default, including successful checks. In the example below, it currently only expands skipped checks:

I also feel like the red outline for awaiting reviews is a bit too aggressive, especially when coupled with removing so much green (no full checkmark as well as including skipped checks as gray in the outline).

[yorik]

Successful checks often includes diff, which important to check before approving, so keeping them easy accessible is very important.

[lessthnthree]

Yeah, when a PR is fine, checks passed, just waiting review, it immediately threw me off to see it now in red. Red I usually associate with some action required on my part to resolve.

[NathanaelGandhi]

My preference would be while checks are still running/pending/failed to either expand the checks group or have an account setting to automatically expand those groups by default. Passing checks defaulting to collapsed seems like a sensible choice as I'm not waiting on them and they would not require intervention. Therefore not seeing a list of checks screams things completed and are fine.

[saiichihashimoto]

When UI elements are collapsed, it helps because there's often something below that I'd rather not scroll to. If not, then it's not helping me consolidate space for anything. Successful checks are already on the bottom, you're not saving me any effort by keeping them collapsed by default. But you are adding a click for when I do need them.

[dustyholmes-wf]

In this thread, it seems that we have two classes of users. Those who want to see things collapsed by default and those that don't.

If you want it collapsed, you probably have a lot of jobs and just need to see what fails at a glance.
If you want it expanded, you probably have very few jobs or have a need for a successful job to be available.

Would it be so bad for this to be a remembered thing per user or repository? I collapsed successful jobs, so maybe that isn't useful to me or this repository. It seems like some elements of the new merge experience remember your choices, others do not. I'd just like to see this morph into something that is consistently useful for as many people as possible.

For me, showing successful jobs is a problem. Showing skipped jobs, is a problem. At least one of the repositories I work with has a very big workflow and that's just not something I can parse.

[spytheman]

Checks grouped by status: checks are now grouped by status with failing checks prioritized at the top of the list, making it easier to identify issues that need attention

THANK YOU 🙇🏻‍♂️ ❤️ 🥳 !

[spytheman]

I have a repository that has over 40 jobs that are commonly running and sometimes depending on what is changed, that can grow up to 76. Previously I had to scroll/hunt for the failing jobs A LOT.
The improvement in this alone, made my daily Github experience a lot better 🥳 .

[Lukeghenco]

We are glad to hear about this. GitHub developers have infinitely more than 76 on many of our repos (as do a ton of larger repositories using GitHub), so this was something we felt would really help the DX. Thank you for the feedback.

[joshhunt]

Bringing failing checks to the top is a huge win. Thanks for this 🙌

[ditman]

I came to say the same, I routinely work on a repo that has 70+ checks, and collapsing the results, and moving the failing to the top makes this much nicer :)

[maples3]

Is there any way to disable the auto-collapsing? We've had issues with Actions failing to run or delaying start, so I've built up mental memory of "no green checkmarks == something is wrong". Collapsing everything here makes it look, at first glance, like nothing has run, which is a problem that needs to be addressed. I would much prefer to have the option to keep all sections expanded here

[genintho]

Checks ordered alphabetically: status checks are now ordered alphabetically to make it easier to find a specific check

The sorting is braking. little bit when using matrix with numbers.

[willsmythe]

Totally agree. We have an internal issue tracking this. I'll add it to the list of Known issues > Planned changes above.

[willsmythe]

@genintho - can you give this another try? We rolled out a fix today to order status checks more logically.

[genintho]

@willsmythe it looks fixed! Thank you!

[vladaionescu]

It would be good if the checks didn't move around. It's hard to click on them when they keep shifting order.

[mrgrain]

When using the "Deployment protection rules" feature, a workflow job might require explicit approval (separate from the PR). It should be possible to review and approve deployments from within the PR merge experience.

[UmarGhouse]

I had an issue where a new review was treated as stale, despite being after the latest commit pushed:

Commit history:

Merge blocked message:

[glassesUSA]

Hey - seens that the button that says auto-merge is enabled is missing

New

Old

[ppamorim]

I can't revert to the old experience anymore. Please add the button back.

[matshch]

You can disable it in feature preview window when you click on your profile icon.

[jumpercc]

no such option there =(

[matshch]

It is "New merge experience", but it looks like this option does not actually work

[maples3]

I am also having this problem, I have the "new merge experience" disabled but my status checks are showing the new unhelpfully-collapsed-by-default view on every pull request

[sersorrel]

I can no longer turn this off. I also get this bizarre UI for PRs I didn't author:

which makes me think at first glance that I need to do something... (since usually the "delete branch" button would be on the right-hand side, but since it's not my PR and I'm not a committer on this repo, it's not there, I guess?)

[sersorrel]

I think there's actually something more to this; I think it's partly that the tiny grey text feels like it should be telling me something new, like this:

But sometimes, it's just kind of... "flavour text"? that doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than "perpetuating the pattern of Big Bold Text above and small grey text beneath", to no real benefit.

[dchlopek]

The new experience is still broken for some users:

And now its harder to disable as you're auto-enabling the feature.

[johnpangalos]

We are also experiencing this, seems to be the notice saying this is a bug was just removed, not sure why as it's still an issue...

[johnpangalos]

I guess we'll just disable merge queues for now 🤷

[dchlopek]

@willsmythe Please re-enable the opt-out. New experience still breaks adding to merge queue with Restrict commit metadata rule enabled

[dkpat12]

This has broken the experience for my org. I saw that this was a known issue on the list to be fixed but it is no longer there. Guess Github just doesn't care about this use case.

[dchlopek]

Ok, had a ticket open w/ GitHub and they pushed a fix. This is working for me again.

[kfiven]

Just a green line visible. matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals#4193

[easontm]

The ability to mark my draft PR as "Ready for Review" is gone, and I can't disable the new merge experience in Feature Preview (it isn't listed)

[willsmythe]

Thanks for reporting. We'll investigate. Can you provide a link to the PR (doesn't need to be accessible or public; we'll use the info to look up the PR in our logs).

[willsmythe]

@easontm - are you the author of the PR? If not, do you have write access to the repo?

[easontm]

Sure, the PR is here.

(I am the author, it's just my GitHub EMU account). I was able to mark it as ready via the CLI command gh pr ready but obviously that's not an ideal user path.

[nikolaydubina]

still UI breaks. did you guys test with custom zoom levels? I set zoom to 80% always. this UI breaks.

[nikolaydubina]

How do I Opt-Out of this UI? while it does not work properly?

I do not see it in Feature Preview.

[anthonyshew]

The checks are currently ordered with the Pending chunk first, so we stare at checks that aren't actively running for most of the PR's lifecycle. It would be great if the first chunk was In Progress so I can see what's currently happening easier.

[sersorrel]

There seems to be a misworded warning if you make a PR to a project you're not a committer to:

Here it says "You're not authorized to push to this branch." – but I am, else how would I have made the PR!? I guess what it means is "you're not allowed to merge this PR" – so it should say that...

The link in that screenshot is also overly verbose and not actually clickable, perhaps it would look better like this?

(the PR in question is strawberry-graphql/strawberry#3800)

[krzyczak]

Why do you even call it "improved pull request experience". Nothing is improved. It's all much worse.
For example:

1. before I could just click a link to view details, now I need to click 3 dots and then "View details". What's the point of making it 2 clicks instead of 1-click?

2. Why are checks jumping around being grouped by status instead of by name like before. I could easily see visually what passed and what failed without reading the names of the checks - now I need to actually read which one failed.

Why do some UX people need to show they "usefulness" by breaking something that works?

Also, why the heck are you forcing me to use the new crappy experience? Why don't you let me choose which one I want?

[gmitch215]

My only gripe is that there is no "Add your review" button when it requires a review. I have to do an extra button.