Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Even if you don't want to treat "master" specially, there's two actual > reasons to do so: > > (a) the technical one: it's the old default one in a lot of existing > repositories, so if there is no defaultBranchName, it effectively > _was_ that > > (b) the non-technical one: if the aim is to get rid of "master" > terminology, THAT IS EXACTLY what the code did before it was removed. > > So really. Both from a technical _and_ a terminology angle, that > commit was just wrong. Your "if the aim is" is curious---the change is not particularly aimed for that. As far as I understand it, it was also to retire the "one single thing is special among others" mentality (which by the way I find somewhat offending). The original did two things wrong, i.e. treated one thing specially, and designated 'master' which has been declared a dirty word as that special thing. Killing these two wrongs with one stone does not feel so stupid.
