I’ve started converting my ‘master’ branches to ‘main’, due to the fact that my muscle-memory has decided that ‘main’ is the standard name. And I don’t have strong feelings either was
I think ‘master’ is fine for the master branch. It’s a master copy of the codebase.
I think ‘main’ is fine for the main branch. It’s the main branch of the repo.
I use ‘main’ at work cos that’s what my git client defaults to. I use ‘master’ at home because that’s what my git client defaults to. 🤷♂️
I use master and apprentice. Always two there are, no more, no less.
So that’s why Sith were considered evil
I think will actually start using this “master” and “apprentice” now. Love it lol
Only a sith deals in absolutes, I will do what I must.
I prefer master exactly for that reason
What are you doing step-branch?
I’m fairly confident the random branches I spin off to try out a dumb idea are not equal to main.
I know mine are worth less than others.
I dislike master because main is shorter and faster to type
doesn’t matter:
maTABSome newbie at project: git checkout -b main_problem_task123
The best reason is always in the comments
I do whatever work wants me to do. you want “main” or “icecream” as the production branch, whatever.
I’ll keep using master for all my personal repos because it’s a master record of the source from which all other branches are derived. it’s like the difference between “read” and “read”. spelled the same but completely different definitions.
… Has anyone adopted a ‘Master’ - ‘Padawan’ paradigm?
Treat branches like Chinese dynasties. The mainline branch is the one having the mandate of heaven.
And they tend to fracture and rejoin seemingly at random, but with certain regularity
Imagine the mess in a thousand people project where all branches are “equal”
I work on a few repos that have branches that are rarely merged to the default one and it’s quite annoying
I’m… I’m not sure that’s the flex you think it is.
I think it’s mostly a shitpost lol
White shitpost?
It just bothers me that “master” branch is a misnomer. It’s a hold over from CVS/SVN where there was actually a central authoritative branch. I’m not necessary saying the other reasons don’t have merit, as well.
trunk?
Master’s trunk ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
I always rename it to “dev.” Hard to have any problems or confusion with that
You’re not wrong.
git config --global init.defaultBranch mainThe next release branch is the one i am currently working on. No need to merge it back to the other one
i just call my main git branches trunk
