Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> 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 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". > 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". -- 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