Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] doc: format-patch: don't use origin as a branch name

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 4, 2014, 18:23 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqfvhcru50.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq38dctcmz.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Compared to that, what the user's local 'master' has is much less
> relevant.  For one thing, if a more recent commit that is on the
> remote repository is missing on 'origin/master' because you haven't
> fetched recently, by definition that commit will not be on your
> 'master' either, so you have the same staleness issue to the exact
> degree.  Even worse, when you are developing a topic to upstream, it

clarification. I used "to upstream" as a verb to mean "sending the work you did to be applied".

Show 6 quoted lines

> is a good practice to merge your topic to your own 'master' to check
> it with the wider project codebase that is more recent than where
> your topic earlier forked from, and it makes little sense to tell
> 'exclude what I have on my master' to format-patch when extracting
> changes to upstream out of such a topic.  You send what the other
> side has, not what you do not have on your local 'master' branch.

and I have a stupid typo here; obviously I should have typed: You send what the other side "does not have".