"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > This is the big one. This changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main, > reflecting what many open source projects already did (which was followed by > GitHub, Azure Repos and others). Can we please not simply replace one hard coded branch name with another? Having a blessed name for the initially created branch continues to imply the branch has special significance. As the initially created branch does not have special significance can we please do something that does not imply that? Instead of having a fixed name across all repos for the initially created branch can we instead use the directory name of the repo for the branch name? Advantages: - The branch name that is somewhat meaningful to the creator of the git repo. I have at least two repos where I wound up doing this by hand. So at least for me it is something I am doing anyway. - Tools can not hard code the name of an initially created branch and expect it to work. This moves us farther from the realm of people assuming incorrectly that there is something special about the branch created by default. - As the name is somewhat meaningful. This change to the initial branch name becomes something that can be argued is a technical improvement rather than a simple political statement. At least for my usage main is a pretty huge misnomer as I barely use the branch with the master. Renaming my unused branch main implies that I am using the tool wrong. I don't look in on the git list very often so perhaps I am missing a conversation where all of the details were thought through. If so please point me at that conversation. Otherwise can we please use this opportunity to come up with something that is actually better than naming the default branch main, rather than just something just as awkward whose only advantage is that people don't think it is politically incorrect this week. Eric
