<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Aha, got it. Thanks for
the explanation.</font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/8/2021 2:17 PM, David Lloyd wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANghgrTjPCY0WEO+ph_gBmYb=Q4jg_JFJaE8vLjHa+67LeUt1A@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">When working
with GitHub, it is common to use the `origin` remote to
correspond to your fork of the project. It's idiomatic to
use `upstream` to refer to the upstream project. So when
you said you pushed up "both revisions" I assume you meant
that you pushed one or both branches to your fork, via
`origin`. If your `origin` points to the upstream
repository, I would expect a "push" to fail unless you have
the appropriate permissions to create a new branch on the
upstream repository. Since I don't see a `lists` or
`assert` branch on the upstream LLVM repository, I would
conclude that this must be the case.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">To answer
your question: Git keeps a copy of the branch pointers for
every remote that you fetch from or push to (in Git, a
"pull" is a "fetch" followed by a "merge"). So when you see
`origin/xxx` in your log, that refers to the commit that
branch `xxx` on `origin` was pointing to when you last
fetched from or pushed to it. If you had pushed anything
anywhere, I would expect there to be a branch name in the
commit log corresponding to the remote branch (`origin/xxx`)
as well as the local one (`xxx`).</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>