Skip to main content

Branch merge broke all component instances across all working files — conflict error on every instance, restore & republish did not help

  • March 6, 2026
  • 3 replies
  • 64 views

Felix Pfahlert

Here is the forum post with the full technical section added:

Title: Branch merge broke all component instances across all working files — conflict error on every instance, restore & republish did not help

Hey Figma Community,

I'm dealing with a critical issue and would really appreciate any help or shared experience.

What happened: I merged a branch back into my main library file (we work with a large design system, 100+ components). The branch only contained changes to one component (Segmented Control). After merging and publishing, every single component instance across all consumer/working files now shows this error:

"The properties and values of this variant are conflicting. Change the applied values on this variant to resolve this."

This affects every component — not just the one I worked on.

What I've already tried:

  • Restored the library to multiple previous versions via Version History, including a version from one week before the branch was created — republished each time
  • Accepted library updates in all consumer files after each republish
  • Cleared Figma desktop cache
  • Disconnected and reconnected the library in consumer files
  • Dragged fresh instances from the Assets Panel — still broken

Technical deep-dive (via Figma Plugin API / Desktop Bridge MCP)

Using the Figma Desktop Bridge plugin I was able to investigate programmatically. Here is exactly what we found:

1. The library file is internally healthy The component set for Alert (184:34170, key 32f8c0abb7138373ab78515ef0e83d41f4e29c18) has all 36 variants and all 7 properties intact. No errors when reading componentPropertyDefinitions locally.

2. Consumer files receive a broken published snapshot Consumer files reference the same component set key but with a different node ID (1:4706, later 2:4218 after republish). Accessing componentPropertyDefinitions on these nodes throws:

"Component set has existing errors"

Accessing componentProperties on instances throws:

"Component set for node has existing errors"

3. Instances are not fully broken — they still resolve getMainComponentAsync() returns successfully with isBroken: false. The instances find their main component, but the component set's property structure is corrupt in the published state.

4. The property reference nodes are gone The internal property reference nodes 184:0, 184:5, 184:10, 184:15 (corresponding to label, icon, has icon, has button) no longer exist in the library file after the restore. These nodes are referenced in componentPropertyDefinitions key suffixes and their absence appears to cause the structural corruption.

5. Every new publish creates a new broken node

  • First publish after restore → consumer sees node 1:4706 → broken
  • Second publish → consumer sees node 2:4218 → still broken

This strongly suggests the publish pipeline is serializing a broken internal state, not the healthy editor state.

6. Attempted fix via Plugin API We deleted and recreated the 4 broken properties (label, icon, has icon, has button) directly on the component set via addComponentProperty. The properties were successfully recreated with fresh node IDs (10806:0, 10806:37, 10806:74, 10806:111). However, after republishing, the consumer files still show the conflict error — suggesting the issue may be deeper than the property definitions alone.

Current state

  • Library file: visually and internally healthy
  • Published state: broken on every publish
  • All 100+ components affected across all working files
  • Support ticket filed: Case #1782308

Has anyone experienced this before? Specifically after a branch merge that caused component property reference nodes to be deleted. Is there a way to force Figma to do a full re-serialization of the published state rather than a delta update?

Any help is massively appreciated. 🙏

3 replies

Tom Reem
Figmate
  • Figmate
  • March 8, 2026

Hi ​@Felix Pfahlert, welcome to Figma Forum — and thanks for taking the time to document everything so thoroughly. I’m sorry to hear how disruptive this has been for your team.

I checked in on this and have a couple of updates:

  • While I can’t access or share account- or file-specific details here for privacy reasons, I connected with our Technical Quality team and your report has been merged into ticket: 1782147, where our engineering team is actively investigating. I’ve also shared your post so they have the full context from your side. They’ll follow up with you directly as soon as they have an update.
  • Separately, our engineering team recently resolved an issue that may be related to some of the behavior you described. We’re continuing to share updates in this thread: "Properties and values of this variant are conflicting" - but they are not.

In the meantime, please keep an eye on the email inbox associated with your Figma account for updates from the team. And if you notice any changes or improvements on your end, feel free to share them here as well — that context can be helpful while the investigation continues.


Felix Pfahlert

Hi ​@Tom Reem ,

Thank you so much for taking the time to look into this and for connecting with the Technical Quality team — that means a lot, especially on a Sunday evening.

Great to hear the case has been merged into ticket 1782147 and that the engineering team is actively investigating. I'll keep a close eye on my inbox for updates.

The thread you linked looks very relevant — I'll go through it carefully. If I notice any changes or improvements on my end I'll report back here immediately.

Thanks again for the support. Really appreciated. 🙏

Felix


Tom Reem
Figmate
  • Figmate
  • March 15, 2026

Thanks for the kind words, ​@Felix Pfahlert — really glad we could help. Appreciate you sticking with us while the team worked through this. If anything else comes up down the road, don't hesitate to reach out here. 💯