On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:10:01 -0400
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What if we work on making this configurable for now, but stick with
> the legacy name until we introduce breaking sha1 changes? Almost
> everything will need to retool for those anyway (and all
> documentation rewritten), so it is reasonable to bundle these changes
> to happen at the same time.
Makes perfect sense to me. No reasonable person can argue against
giving individual repository owners the ability to *easily* call their
"primary" branch anything they want.
This flame war plus the publicity it generated lets everybody know that
someday, whether in 1 month or 5 years, the default will be something
other than "master", so they'll start changing their software and
scripts to accommodate a variable instead of a hardcode, so when the
change happens, there will be minimal software disruption and minimal
hurt feelings.
SteveT
Steve Litt
May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques
