Having a version that doesn't pass tests is just a way of delaying the fixing of test until some time later, where the authors of the tests might have forgotten

Having a version that doesn't pass tests is just a way of delaying the fixing of test until some time later, where the authors of the tests might have forgotten about them. And obviously, under the hope that somebody notices the failure by then, tracks it down to the right commit, and fixes the commit, instead of adding a workaround that avoid having to find the root of the problem. "master doesn't pass tests" isn't just about naming. Its about culture. Its about agreeing that there is some source of code that everyone agrees on should work, and having the culture of agreeing that all modifications to it should work as well, and that it is the responsibility of those doing the modifications to make sure that's the case.