I have never liked origin for a remote name. Is origin your user github repo (which could make sense) or is in the upstream version which is the 'origin' of the the library.

To be fair, my use of 'github' for the user's repository is just as confusing.

FWIW numpy have also documented a similar thing: http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/dev/gitwash/development_workflow.html#rebasing-on-master

@pelson I (humbly) like my version better because I include the output of the middle steps, but I will include a link.

don't merge this, I am going to go through and update the rest of the git documentation as well (git is changing under us a bit in the way it deals with push).

I also plan to change origin -> github as a remote name everywhere.

I am also going to remove the text about emailing diffs to the mailing list to bring our documentation into line with our practice (which seems to be to make PRs and then do the review in the PR).

I didn't notice before, you are adding this text to doc/devel/coding_guide.rst I think it belongs to doc/devel/gitwash/development_workflow.rst It is not coding per se, it's github and more specifically git related.

Actually that link development_workflow is the reference for all of us newcomers and git virgins.

Just a little extra, the origin vs github name.
I prefer origin, when you look for documentation non related to matplotlib, in general everybody use origin representing your fork in github. And consistence with the rest of the documentation is more important than personal preferences (origin is used in gitwash stuff)

@tacaswell
For the requested review, please check my last comment.
In short my suggestions are:

• Use origin instead of github
• Belongs to development_workflow.rst and not to coding_guide.rst

Sorry, this issue should have been tagged as needs revision, thanks for poking me on this.

punted

I'll do a PR against your PR.

I think the only outstanding issues is my use of github vs origin for the users repo. I personally detest the use of origin as a remote name, but if consensus is to change it back I will.

I think you'll have to rebase onto master :)

Decided to try out the 'retarget branch' functionality.

@QuLogic Is that better wording?

Looks reasonable.

Thanks!

🎉 Excited to get this in after so long!