8 ms·
Could we please get back the master-branch on this repository?
- Havoc 5y agoI've found the resulting mix of master and main to be even more problematic. Now script etc need if statements etc
- totony 5y agoYeah, ive had issues with repos on github having master and new ones having main. Github api seems to force the default branch to main (on new repos) making fixing this harder as well. It's not that big of a deal but sure is a hassle.
- wutbrodo 5y ago> Github api seems to force the default branch to main (on new repos) Jesus, really? I didn't pay much attention to the master nonsense because I figured it would be limited to projects who cared more about social performance than building something useful, but it sounds like it's being forced at the platform-level onto every project. OTOH, the impact is mitigated for new projects
- totony 5y agoI may have misspoken, you can change the default branch after the fact, my issue was with the "auto-create README" feature
- Grollicus 5y agoI just created a new repo with just a master branch. Where does Github force anything? They're sure suggesting it - their suggested commands to initialize a new repo will create a main branch. But you can just ignore that suggestion?
- Jiejeing 5y agoedit: my bad, I expected it to be the case but it turns out I had it in my gitconfig instead. They are just going along the git default, so yes, a new repo will be on main branch by default.
- JimDabell 5y agoNo, the Git default is still master. GitHub changed their default to main.
- zerocrates 5y agoIt's just that, and the "create a first commit/branch/README for me" thing it can do presumably does that with "main" now also.
- totony 5y agoAs @zerocrates mentioned, it's about the github auto commit feature when creating a new repo. This makes bootstrapping using terraform more complicated.
- JimDabell 5y agoPerhaps you missed that the person you are replying to was talking about the GitHub API and not their web interface? Here’s the API reference: https://docs.github.com/en/rest/reference/repos#create-an-organization-repository https://docs.github.com/en/rest/reference/repos#create-an-or... I don’t see any parameter for setting the default to master instead of main. However it does seem like you can change it after it has been created with a subsequent update call.
- deknos 5y agoi think it's even funnier, that production systems do not use their own copy/fork of such repositories.. and it QUITE shows, how we parasitize from each other. How can you expect a foreign system (which you can clone!) to always adhere to your standards, when there's not even a formal declaration what they will do and which migration standards they will follow. i mean i can understand that for the garage-hobby-project.. for projects like yocto which are used by companies.. well the companies should pay yocto some money, so they at least can buy storage/whatever at github or another repository place.
- pnathan 5y agoyocto is also an embedded system, where you should be taking care of these things tidily, because your target devices are not always trivially updatable and often have longer lifetime cycles than revs of normal software
- deknos 5y agoYES! EXACTLY!
- Havoc 5y agoHaha truth be told this is on my selfhosted gitlab and I just don't know how to rename it. The old ones are master new repos main
- japhib 5y agoAn if statement???? Can you imagine? Next thing you know we'll need VARIABLES
- Havoc 5y agoMore branching logic means more opportunity for bugs. Even if it is just an if statement. From a pure bug perspective this change has literally only downsides
- boardwaalk 5y agoIf you were assuming ‘master’ you were probably already making a bad assumption. I’ve seen projects that use ‘dev’, ‘develop’, etc, etc. I’d consider it a good thing to make your scripts less fragile.
- sebazzz 5y agoThere is a HEAD ref which represents the default branch, and points to master, main, develop or whatever.
- satokema_work 5y agoRemoving 'slave' from the vocabulary makes more sense than removing 'master', master is a term that predates its usage in slavery contexts. Asking (and explaining the logic of main vs master) would be better UX than forcing a new paradigm into contexts where it's not welcome - all of my corpo repos use master; sneaking main into new repos is not helpful.
- hartator 5y agoRemoving any words of the vocabulary is an aberration.
- ceejayoz 5y agoEntirely to the contrary, it's 100% normal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaism https://www.businessinsider.com/best-old-english-words-that-no-longer-exist-2017-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/best-old-english-words-that-... Language evolves, and has since it was invented.
- ComputerGuru 5y agoWords falling out of use and words being taken out of use are two altogether different beasts. I suspect you might be commenting disingenuously, though.
- ceejayoz 5y agoYou're free to name a Github branch "master" if you want. Others are free to pick "main". Github's free to pick a default. People are free to infer what they like from your choice. Over time, we figure out which one we, as a society, prefer.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- audessuscest 5y ago
- renewiltord 5y agoIs the master assumption baked into things like “go get”? Interesting consequence of the branch name change then.
- agilob 5y agoI think the more interesting thing is that old, most central branch (trying to avoid saying main) has been removed instead kept and locked from updates.
- boardwaalk 5y agoDoing that sounds “invisible error” prone. People may assume that master gets updates. I’d rather have an error be thrown, personally.
- WalterGR 5y agoIs this interesting for any reason beyond the obvious culture war one? This is the 6th highest-ranking submission over the past 12 months: GitHub, fuck your name change (mooseyanon.medium.com) 3353 points by leontrolski | 10 months ago | 2084 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26487854 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26487854 Presumably breakage was anticipated back then? What does this add?
- draw_down 5y ago
- bewaretheirs 5y agoIt shows ongoing impact rather than a one-time cost from an incompatible change.
- WalterGR 5y agoFor one team? at one org who didn’t keep their stuff up-to-date regarding one project. A collection of tickets such as this one plus some analysis? Could be interesting. But this is just noise. Edit: To be interesting, that analysis would have to compare with other kinds of breaking changes that happen in software constantly.
- drewcoo 5y agoOr does the exception prove the rule? The fact that this is the only instance of problems says that the change effectively caused no ongoing problems.
- bertjk 5y agoCan this problem be solved using symbolic refs? e.g. git symbolic-ref refs/heads/master refs/heads/main or something similar?
- hartator 5y agoI had a desktop tool yesterday randomly bugging because it was expecting the branch to be named `master` or `main`. What a waste of time.
- Jiejeing 5y agoI am unclear what is the value added by this link, other than to rekindle some inflammatory discussion that was had at length already? It shows that the go build tools are especially brittle and making assumptions they should not. And that for some reason people do not maintain a local cache of their dependencies, while having unreasonable expectations of FOSS library maintainers (this library will apparently be archived on the 28th of this month if no new maintainer steps up).
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- TeeMassive 5y ago> I am unclear what is the value added by this link, other than to rekindle some inflammatory discussion that was had at length already? Then don't up-vote it and keep scrolling. That's usually the way when someone sees an uninteresting post. It is strange that you must post about it in the post.
- dvh 5y agoYou can change it in settings. I recently started new repo and it was easy to set up to be master. Repository default branch https://github.com/settings/repositories https://github.com/settings/repositories
- evocatus 5y agoIf only we could channel all this lost time, money, and productivity into addressing the actual roots of societal problems, _in the real world._
- Ekaros 5y agoThat might start to question where do we spend money and refocus it to solving problems... Can't have that...
- ComputerGuru 5y agoA proposed answer, probably by someone from here as it was just commented: > Is it a lot of hassle to fork, make some script (maybe github action?) to auto update your fork, and use git symbolic-ref to make master point to main? Once you have your auto update in place you're basically hands off from there right? I feel like there’s a satire tag missing.
- macrowhat 5y ago
- mbakke 5y agoThe proper solution would be for Go tooling to integrate the Software Heritage archive. Here is the code for the "v1.5.1" tag: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/directory/da02f8b59a288b9d35e7d010b7bfb9ffac6cc440/ https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/directory/da02f8b... You can schedule archival of any odd revision, and look it up later either by content checksum or by revision.
- nathanaldensr 5y agoOne of the first things I do when setting up a new developer machine: git config --global init.defaultBranch master