Jay Soffian [off-list ref] writes:
I think I'm not clear how it helps to make the integration branch
throw-away. Unless you mean something like git pu?
The whole idea of making it throw-away came from that you do not have
control over your upstream and you would want to work with their
upstream-master and "upstream-a of the week".
I think your squinted version essentially is the same as what I outlined,
modulo that your "local-master" corresponds to what I called "local-base".
No matter what we call that branch, as long as you need to be able to
integrate cleanly with both upstream-master and the upstream-a (that is
built by cherry-picking and then thrown away from time to time) and able
to move forward without too much cruft in your history, "local-base" needs
to stay away from merging upstream-a.