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

resending - send mail failure - Original Message - From: Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org To: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com Cc: GitList git@vger.kernel.org; Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 5:03 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] doc: format-patch

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

Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes: From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com ... Nowhere I am assuming that the reader is creating paches based on wherever someone else had got to. Sorry, but I have no idea what you are complaining about. I think we are talking at cross purposes. My

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

Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes: Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch used 'origin' as the upstream branch name. That name is now used as the nominal name for the upstream remote. While 'origin' would be DWIMmed (do what I mean) to be that remote's

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

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: 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

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

From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes: Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch used 'origin' as the upstream branch name. That name is now used as the nominal name for the upstream remote. While 'origin' would be DWIMmed

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

Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes: This however is backwards, no? The history on 'origin/master' may not be up-to-date in the sense that if you run 'git fetch' you might get more, but it absolutely is up-to-date in the sense that it shows what the origin has to the best of your

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

From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes: This however is backwards, no? The history on 'origin/master' may not be up-to-date in the sense that if you run 'git fetch' you might get more, but it absolutely is up-to-date in the sense that it shows what

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

Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch used 'origin' as the upstream branch name. That name is now used as the nominal name for the upstream remote. While 'origin' would be DWIMmed (do what I mean) to be that remote's primary branch, do not assume the reader is ready