So creating a new repo on GitHub, you get a set of getting started steps. They changed the default branchname to “main” from “master” due to its connotations with slavery.
When I create a new repo now, the initial getting started steps recommend creating a branch named “master” as opposed to “main” as it was a while ago.
It’s especially weird since the line git branch -M master is completely unnecessary, since git init still sets you up with a “master” branch.
Disclaimer: I have a bunch of private repos, and my default branchnames are pretty much all “master”.
Is this a recent change?
Edit: Mystery solved, my default branchname is “master”. Thanks bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone !
God I wish. The change to “main” was pointless and unnecessary. It’s almost like people want to find problems when there aren’t any.
I like it, because it forced people not to assume
masteris the main branch. If something is common enough to almost be a standard, but it’s not actually a standard, it’s just waiting for disaster.These assumptions cause unnecessary breakage, but people will make them unless forced not to.
If something is common enough to be a standard it’s a standard.
And yet not everyone used to use
master, so scripts kept breaking for no good reason.Either make it a standard, or stop assuming it’s a standard. De-facto isn’t good enough.
Having a magical standard fairy waive a wand isn’t going to fix scripts, or stop them from breaking.
What? If there’s an actual standard, it will stop scripts from breaking, because the assumption that
masteris the main branch will always be true.Americans and their silly performative outrage
A form of art they have main-ered.
I guess masterpieces are now mainpieces