Errors in Jira Bitbucket integration--other tickets showing up in pull requests

[Hovig Deveijan]

There are multiple pull requests showing up in an unrelated ticket and we're not sure what's going on.

We've reindexed our project but the issue persists

[Andy Heinzer]

Please have a look at this thread to see if this is related:

https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-questions/What-links-a-JIRA-issue-to-Bitbucket-commits-PRs/qaq-p/629638

My thought is that @Mikael Sandberg's response on that thread might explain what you are seeing here:

JIRA issues are linked when you mention the JIRA key in Bitbucket, either in the branch name, as part of the description or comment in a pull request or as part of the commit comment (as you have seen). 

Here is some more information about the integration, https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/jira-integration-776639874.html

If that is what is happening there, then I'd check to see if that JIRA issue key is being mentioned somewhere in those other pull requests.

[Hovig Deveijan]

This makes sense--is there a good way to disable this?  We talk about Jira a lot in our tickets, that might complicate matters for us. 

I went through all settings of Jira and Bitbucket and did not see the option to do so

[Mikael Sandberg]

The only way to turn it off would be to remove the application links between Bitbucket and Jira, but that would remove the integration all together.

[John Bain]

I'm running in to the exact same issue now, which is causing massive issues when creating Jira filter queries based on pr status (especially bad when releasing). Here's the main problem with this design: By default, Jira branch names include the issue key, and by default the BitBucket pull request commit message includes the branch name. So, now we have Jira issues with branches, and pull requests created from them, then merged and closed, but any branch off of develop which "refreshes" from the main integration branch (develop), then picks up those merge commits which contain the Jira Issue ID/branch name. I'm thinking the most complicated manner to fix this issue is to require either a rebase when "refreshing" from develop (rebasing, though a very useful strategy, is absurdly complex when you have a monolithic codebase of over 8 million LOC, and over 200+ developers). I wish instead that the default bitbucket branch commit history, which I'm assuming is what is being used by Jira, instead used a default --first-parent, or even a git log HEAD ^develop type of filter so as not to include all the commits which have occurred on the integration branch. If there is some configuration setting to avoid this, I would love to know it. Please help :-)