Bitbucket gitflow and main branch

[Jeffry van de Vuurst]

Hi,

I'm trying to implement gitflow using Bitbucket and for that I want to change my main branch from master to develop. The daily development work will be done on develop and branching to feature branches and then pull requests back to develop. I think it makes more sense to have develop set to the main branch, right?

However, when doing this, Bitbucket won't let me merge changes from develop back to master.

Am I missing something? What is the proposed way of implementing gitflow on Bitbucket?

[Doug Beeman]

I know this is years later, but I still wasn't able to find a definitive answer to whether the "main branch" in BitBucket should be develop or master for gitflow. I chose develop, which makes reintegrating feature branches easier. Then I use SourceTree's Git Flow button to handle releases or hotfixes.

It seems to me that whether I choose develop or master for the "main branch" setting, BitBucket just isn't going to be able to handle reintegrating a hotfix or release branch into both develop and master in one step. For those, I think I would have to do two merges, one to the "main branch" and then change the destination of the merge for the other.

[Mike “Bran” Branford]

Was looking for this too. I think you need to 'git flow init' your local repo then push it to the remote. Just make a copy first...as I have yet to do this myself.

[Jeffry van de Vuurst]

Anyone?