doc: misleading remote repo

[thangktran]

From Pull Request (Step 9)

It is also frequently necessary to synchronize your Pull Request with other changes that have landed in master by using git rebase:
$ git fetch --all
$ git rebase origin/master
$ git push --force-with-lease origin my-branch

Why is it git rebase origin/master and not git rebase upstream/master ?

[bnoordhuis]

origin is conventionally the name used for the canonical upstream repository. It's not a Node.js idiosyncrasy, if that's what you're wondering.

Compare: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9529497/what-is-origin-in-git

[thangktran]

origin is conventionally the name used for the canonical upstream repository. It's not a Node.js idiosyncrasy, if that's what you're wondering.

Compare: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9529497/what-is-origin-in-git

@bnoordhuis I think the guide is not consistent.
Since in the other Step, upstream is used to mention "upstream" (nodejs/node) and origin is used to mention forked repo.
Or did i misunderstand something?

[mscdex]

FWIW I always keep origin the same and use something like github_fork to point to my fork of the project so it's always clear.

[Trott]

Based on step 1 and the other parts of the doc, I think you're right and it should be upstream instead of origin.

[thangktran]

I will create a fix if noone objects to it.

[mustafafatal]

"upstream" generally refers to the original repo that you have forked.

"origin" is your fork; your own repo on GitHub, clone of the original repo of GitHub.

check this out:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9257533/what-is-the-difference-between-origin-and-upstream-on-github