Re: [RFC/PATCH] format-patch: introduce branch.*.forkedFrom

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I do not mind allowing laziness by defaulting to something, but I am
>> not enthused by an approach that adds the new variable whose value
>> is questionable.  The description does not justify at all why
>> @{upstream} is not a good default (unless the workflow is screwed up
>> and @{upstream} is set to point at somewhere that is _not_ a true
>> upstream, that is).
>
> Did you find the explanation I gave in
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/240077
> reasonable?

No.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]