Banned from upstream repo for accidental PR's

[mooleshacat]

Select Topic Area

Product Feedback

Body

So I forked iv-org/invidious and made my own fork. I accidentally many times submitted my PR to them instead of my own repository.

This is because GitHub has a habit of selecting the upstream repository instead of my repository to make the PR to.

Most times I notice and change it back to my repository, but many times I've not noticed and submitted the PR to upstream.

Although I've always closed them immediately, they have banned me for 30 days which is fine to me, because I don't plan on making PR's and if they want my code they can just cherry-pick it.

It would be nice if I could have it automatically select my fork instead of the upstream fork when I make a PR from within my repository.

In order to make a PR to the upstream, I should have to go to the upstream repository and click on the pull requests tab to open one to the main repository.

Is there any way GitHub can make it so when you submit a PR from your repository it selects your repository (and not the upstream) as the repository to submit to?

Thanks

[github-actions[bot]]

💬 Your Product Feedback Has Been Submitted 🎉

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us! Your feedback is invaluable as we build a better GitHub experience for all our users.

Here's what you can expect moving forward ⏩

• Your input will be carefully reviewed and cataloged by members of our product teams. 
  • Due to the high volume of submissions, we may not always be able to provide individual responses.
  • Rest assured, your feedback will help chart our course for product improvements.
• Other users may engage with your post, sharing their own perspectives or experiences. 
• GitHub staff may reach out for further clarification or insight. 
  • We may 'Answer' your discussion if there is a current solution, workaround, or roadmap/changelog post related to the feedback.

Where to look to see what's shipping 👀

• Read the Changelog for real-time updates on the latest GitHub features, enhancements, and calls for feedback.
• Explore our Product Roadmap, which details upcoming major releases and initiatives.

What you can do in the meantime 💻

• Upvote and comment on other user feedback Discussions that resonate with you.
• Add more information at any point! Useful details include: use cases, relevant labels, desired outcomes, and any accompanying screenshots.

As a member of the GitHub community, your participation is essential. While we can't promise that every suggestion will be implemented, we want to emphasize that your feedback is instrumental in guiding our decisions and priorities.

Thank you once again for your contribution to making GitHub even better! We're grateful for your ongoing support and collaboration in shaping the future of our platform. ⭐

[mooleshacat]

thank you for speedy reply, my response is below

[mooleshacat]

Well, the PR works to auto select my repository if I make a branch, but often when I am merging a long time existing branch (like merge development into master) that's when it will select the iv-org repository.

It does not remember anything. Every time it selects iv-org to submit to.

The only time it does not is if I create a new branch based off of development, and then merge that branch into development, it will auto select my repository.

But if I am merging development into master, it always selects the upstream fork.

As for "It's designed this way because most fork-based workflows aim to contribute back to the original project." the original project does not want my code, and if they do, they can cherry-pick it. However the original repository owners have told me they don't normally take code from downstream forks as they typically are tailered to that specific custom fork. Most forks in this project will change the template, and introduce features tailored specifically to their installation of the repository's software.

[mooleshacat]

The way I see it, if I am browsing MY repository, and I click "pull requests" everything in there should be related to MY fork and not the upstream. If I click "new pull request" from inside my repository, it should default to select my repository (not the upstream).

If I want to submit a PR to the upstream I can simply go to their fork and submit the PR from their repository instead (or I can change it from my repo to their repo in the PR)

GitHub can be a great tool for idiots like me. Unfortunately in this case, GitHub is enabling me to be an idiot. It negatively impacts the upstream and I wish not to do that.

[mooleshacat]

Fortunately I have found a solution outside of github.

I have set up my own private gogs instance. Now I can fetch the upstream fork, merge the new changes, and then push it to both gogs and github.

I wish I could do this entirely on github but GitHub is auto selecting the upstream fork every single time I make a PR from development into master.

Hopefully this solves my problem. Now unfortunately GitHub is only a mirror of my repository.

Thanks for your help

[mooleshacat]

I have unmarked the answer.

There is no way the answer to Github selecting the upstream when I am merging from inside my own fork is to not use GitHub.

People (including me) use Github because:

• Github manages versions for you
• You can update the code from upstream by clicking one button
• You can make separate branches for code testing
• There is lots of traffic / clones on Github
• Maybe they can't set up Gogs or Gitea

The problem here is that anyone who forks a repository risks getting banned from the upstream repository every single time they try to merge two branches inside their own repository.

Why when you are inside your own repository does Github decide to select the upstream? No idea, but this can not be the accepted default to get people banned from their upstreams.

The reason this needs to be changed, to select MY fork when I am clicking "new pull request" from inside MY fork:

• I am working inside MY fork, not the upstream
• If I wish to submit code to the upstream I can select the downarrow and select the upstream to merge into
• If the upstream wants my code, they can cherry-pick the code
• The upstream doesn't want my code
• I am simply trying to merge two of my own branches
• Default behavior for Github should not be getting users banned from their upstreams

I do not understand why Github chooses to risk getting everyone banned from their upstreams, and choses to actively make it harder to simply merge two of your own branches.

Every single time you want to merge branches within your own fork, you risk merging into upstream, thus getting banned.

The solution can not be "just dont use github" or "just create a new repository instead of forking" because this takes away all the benefits that Github did provide.

Edit: FYI this has caused many problems, because now I can't even post issue tickets, or replies to issue tickets. I can't even click on an emoticon. Now I need help from the upstream but I cannot post any tickets. Great job, Github! (I don't blame upstream, I blame Github)

[kant2002]

I have similar problem. Even if I do not get banned, I try to maintain repository which is fork of a fork of a fork. The product eventually get forgotten, and neglected, but because of need and low-effort, it make sense maintain it. And now as maintainer I have to constantly change target repository when I do PR as part of my regular workflow.

That's very error prone.