From: "Junio C Hamano"
Jonathan Nieder writes:
Philip Oakley wrote:
Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch
used
'origin' as the upstream branch name. This is now used to name the
remote.
Use the more modern 'master' as the branch name.
Would 'origin/master' m
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Philip Oakley wrote:
>
>> Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch used
>> 'origin' as the upstream branch name. This is now used to name the remote.
>> Use the more modern 'master' as the branch name.
>
> Would 'origin/master' make sense?
It w
Philip Oakley wrote:
> Historically (5 Nov 2005 v0.99.9-46-g28ffb89) the git-format-patch used
> 'origin' as the upstream branch name. This is now used to name the remote.
> Use the more modern 'master' as the branch name.
Would 'origin/master' make sense?
Thanks,
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe from
3 matches
Mail list logo