On 20-dic-2023 12:01:51, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The two-patch series, whose second part is the message I am > responding to, did not see much reaction, but since it came > during an end-user puzzlement and was written to make the docs less > puzzling, I am tempted to merge it down to 'next'. > > Thanks. > If you need some positive feedback; I've read your series and it looks good to me and going in a good direction. I think "unborn branch" is a more accurate term than "orphaned branch". It's not perfect, but I don't have a better one to offer. A nit in 1/2, which of course is not worth a re-roll, is a double blank line near the end; which I suspect is unintentional. Just in case anyone else is looking for the thread where the puzzlement was reported: https://lore.kernel.org/git/FE2AD666-88DE-4F70-8D6D-3A426689EB41@xxxxxx/ Thank you.
