Purely a suggestion - you might have better ideas, or it might not be a problem that needs fixing.
The code uses origin , and complains if origin isn't defined. However, when I'm working on PRs, I may have multiple remotes defined (so I can pull in remote changes easily, rebase, etc).
Likewise, it it often the case that if I'm working in a branch, then the branch is specific to me. Suggestion - offer options for each remote, and either current branch or master. So when I'm working in the some-PR branch with 2 remotes defined (origin, other-remote), it might offer me origin:some-PR, origin:master, other-remote:some-PR, other-remote:master. It is unlikely that other-remote:some-PR exists, but I don't expect the tool to care about that!
Purely a suggestion - you might have better ideas, or it might not be a problem that needs fixing.
The code uses
origin, and complains iforiginisn't defined. However, when I'm working on PRs, I may have multiple remotes defined (so I can pull in remote changes easily, rebase, etc).Likewise, it it often the case that if I'm working in a branch, then the branch is specific to me. Suggestion - offer options for each remote, and either current branch or
master. So when I'm working in thesome-PRbranch with 2 remotes defined (origin,other-remote), it might offer meorigin:some-PR,origin:master,other-remote:some-PR,other-remote:master. It is unlikely thatother-remote:some-PRexists, but I don't expect the tool to care about that!