There is a remote repository on bitbucket. After the inconvenient merge of the branches, the new files are not visible on the bitbucket in the source files.

In the local, everything is fine - I do push origin master - up-to-date. Old files are committed as needed.

In the commits section on bitbucket new files are visible. What to do with it and which way to look at all? Replace the remote repository, unfortunately, is not possible.

  • And the branch is exactly the right one selected? And if you make clone with bitbucket files? - ixSci
  • There is only one branch left - master If you make clone, everything is fine, there are files. If you go to commits, choose a commit - everything is fine, there are files. Ie a situation like: bitbucket.org/username/repo/src * / * / - there is no bitbucket.org/username/repo/src/commit_hash * / - there is - TorSen
  • Does it matter to you what is shown in Source? If so, write to them in technical support, let them see what's wrong there. - ixSci
  • Personally, I do not, but unfortunately there is such a need. Well, you probably have to write if there is no solution. - TorSen
  • @TorSen, the necessary files in the branch master or in some other branch? In src, the master is displayed by default. - insolor

0