-
Suggestion
-
Resolution: Done
-
1,203
-
Hi everyone,
Thanks for your feedback and advocacy on this suggestion. Bitbucket Data Center 7.13 introduces Reviewer groups that allow you to add a group of users as reviewers when creating a Pull request. Project and repository admins will be able to create and manage these groups making it easier for development teams to self-manage. You can read more details here.
Please give it a try and let us know your feedback in a comment below.
Cheers,
Carla Baba
Software developer - Bitbucket Data Center
Original request description
In our workflow, any member of a team may comment on or approve most code reviews. With our previous code review systems (ReviewBoard, then gerrit) we could just add a mailing list or group to the 'Reviewer' list and this would notify all the team. However, with stash pull requests, each user needs to be added manually, which is tedious and error prone for more then a few users.
- is duplicated by
-
BSERV-3188 Allow groups to be added as reviewers
- Closed
-
BSERV-4096 Add Group to Pull Request Reviewers
- Closed
-
BSERV-4784 Tag a team in a pull request
- Closed
-
BSERV-5071 Create Pull Request- 'Reviewers' field does not list groups
- Closed
-
BSERV-7359 Reviewers group in Pull Requests creation and also adding peer reviewers?
- Closed
-
BSERV-8947 Assign groups to review pull requests
- Closed
-
BSERV-9077 Support Groups for "Default Reviewers"
- Closed
-
BSERV-10157 Allow addition of bitbucket user groups as pull request reviewers or as default reviewers
- Closed
-
BSERV-10172 Ability to add multiple reviewers at once when creating pull requests
- Closed
-
BSERV-12410 Abilty to add groups to Reviewers list and have a minimum of 1 approval from each group for merge
- Gathering Interest
- relates to
-
BSERV-10660 Allow groups for default reviewers
- In Progress
- mentioned in
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...
-
Page Loading...