Skip to main content
Skip table of contents

Release Notes v3.0

We’re thrilled to announce that we’ve released Code Owners 3.0 on 🎉

Download on the Atlassian Marketplace for Server and Data Center

Announcement: End of support for Bitbucket Server 5.x

Since Bitbucket Server 5.x reached end of life, we will remove support for it in Code Owners in one of the next releases.

New Features

Let author and participants remove Code Owners as reviewers from a pull request

The rule that all Code Owners are mandatory reviewers that cannot be removed from pull requests was for many of our customers too restrictive and did not match their workflows.

One example is that the pull request creator should be able to remove a Code Owner as a reviewer, e.g. if this person is on holiday, and there are enough other owners to approve to get a pull request merged. Or if a colleague should review a draft version of the pull request changes, not all Code Owners should be notified about the draft version, but only when the pull request is ready for general review.

The assignment of Code Owners as reviewers should really be a convenience helping to select the right people to review a PR, and not for enforcing reviews. Enforcing reviews and approvals are done by the Code Owners specific merge check (as before).

So we removed this rule, and now you can:

  • Remove Code Owners as reviewers on pull request creation or later in the pull request edit modal

  • Re-add removed reviewers later and the app will recognize them as Code Owners again, but the app will skip manually removed Code Owners on pull request updates

  • Enforce approvals by Code Owners before merging by the Code Owners merge check. Therefore, make sure that the merge checks are properly configured → Usage

Possibility to skip Merge checks for repository Administrators (opt-in)

Requested by our users, we added an option in the Merge check settings, to allow repository admins to merge pull requests, even if the Merge checks are not fulfilled.
This should be used sparsely but can be valuable if e.g. a Code Owner is not available, but the pull request should be merged to not block further progress.


Resolved issues in 3.0.3 on

  • Fix combined use of CodeOwners with Default reviewers from Bitbucket

    • Earlier 3.x versions are not compatible with Default reviewers feature

  • Fix Merge checks for rules with individual users, if group merge check is active.

    • If  CodeOwners merge checks are active, any user which is mentioned individually in a active code owner rule, must approve, before pull request can be merged.

    • There was a bug in the group based Merge check validation. If an individual user was also member of a active group rule, the check did not enforce the approval of this individual, if other group members have approved.

  • Improved formatting of CodeOwners active rules explanation in pull request comments and tool-tips.

  • Improved positioning of CodeOwners avatar decorations (Bitbucket 7.9.x and newer)

Resolved issues in 3.0.2 on

  • Fix installation problem of 3.0.0 artifact.

    • Automatic Marketplace upload broke the release artifact.

Resolved issues in 3.0.0 on

Installation problem reported!
Please install version 3.0.2 instead.
Thank you for your understanding.

  • Code owners minimum approvals pattern: *

    • Approval required from all code owners, using the asterisk in merge check config, does now correctly handle the case when the pull request author is at the same time also code owner for changes in the pull request.

  • Destination branch filtering only applies to owner rules, but not top-level configuration anymore.

    • Before, this led to a bug in combination with the subdirectory override feature.

  • Code owners are now correctly considered as code owners after re-added as reviewers to a pull request if they removed themselves before.

  • Avatar decoration of Code Owners had some issues in previous versions, which got fixed in this version.

Previous: Release Notes v2.5

Do you have any questions, suggestions, or problems?

Let us know. We’re glad to help!

JavaScript errors detected

Please note, these errors can depend on your browser setup.

If this problem persists, please contact our support.