4 ms·
Cannot argue with any of the points brought up by the author at all. That being said, "main" is a better name for that branch, especially for people new to VCS.
by smashah 6y ago
Cannot argue with any of the points brought up by the author at all. That being said, "main" is a better name for that branch, especially for people new to VCS. The change would've been worthwhile on its own without the expectation of a standing ovation.
- 3saryHg6LP2e 6y agoIt's fine to think "main" or "trunk" or whatever is a better name, it's very easy with git to use a branch with whatever name you like. The issue I and others have (and I appreciate you aren't saying this in your comment) is we don't agree that "master" is "problematic" at all.
- kmlx 6y agoat an older company we used main. then we created master and development. and the master/main branch was set to development. good luck to anyone inspecting that repo!