New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
1–10 of 126 posts
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#2Good!
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#3This is a tiny change that has no substantial negative effect on anyone’s life. If they’d renamed “pull requests” to “merge requests” no one would care, at all. Let’s please not make a big deal out of it.
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#4I've a Master of Science degree, will that chance too? Is anyone offended by that terminology?
[Edit] maybe I should clarify: in my native language master only has the connotation of mastery of a subject. A slave owner can't be called 'master', so we don't have that unpleasant crossover.
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#5I've a Master of Science degree, will that chance too? Is anyone offended by that terminology? [Edit] maybe I should clarify: in my native language master only has the connotation of mastery of a subject. A slave owner can't be called 'master', so we don't have that unpleasant crossover.
The line is always drawn somewhere, to answer the not very well veiled slippery slope argument. If and when that applies to this specific case, history will show. No one demands everything happen all at once.
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#6I've always thought "master" was a weird name for the default branch
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#7I've a Master of Science degree, will that chance too? Is anyone offended by that terminology? [Edit] maybe I should clarify: in my native language master only has the connotation of mastery of a subject. A slave owner can't be called 'master', so we don't have that unpleasant crossover.
You should main some new language. Master is double plus ungood.
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#8"Starting next month, all new source code repositories created on GitHub will be named "main" instead of "master" as part of the company's effort to remove unnecessary references to slavery and replace them with more inclusive terms."
FFS. Is this some kind of joke? This sort of PC bullshit is gold for rightwingers.
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#9I've a Master of Science degree, will that chance too? Is anyone offended by that terminology? [Edit] maybe I should clarify: in my native language master only has the connotation of mastery of a subject. A slave owner can't be called 'master', so we don't have that unpleasant crossover.
You should main some new language. Master is double plus ungood.
You really should read the entire book instead of pretending to see and point out what you think are similarities
Re: New GitHub repos to have default branches named “main” instead of “master”
#10I've always thought "master" was a weird name for the default branch
The logic behind the name was that it was like a master record which all other copies (branches) were based on. To be honest I think the original terminology of "trunk" always made more sense given that we have things called "branches" (and the first commit is called the "root commit").
But "main" is probably lees cryptic -- I will admit when I first heard the term "trunk" I thought it was referring to either the UK term for suitcase or US term for a car's boot. And of course git has a general principle of never copying anything that SVN did, I guess that includes naming.