4 ms·
Jokes on you, but they changed the default branch to be named "main" instead of "master" for reasons of appropriation.
by the_cramer 4y ago
Jokes on you, but they changed the default branch to be named "main" instead of "master" for reasons of appropriation.
- ghostpepper 4y agoI wonder if they take points away in an interview if you have a master's degree.
- soundnote 4y agoIt's still one of the most stupendous pieces of harmful slacktivism that I've seen. So, so much pointless work fixing thing that didn't need to break, and all for the stupidest reasons possible.
- amluto 4y ago“master” never made much sense to begin with. I’m still a bit disappointed that the default wasn’t set to “default”. I argued for either that or having no default at all. Seriously, ignore political correctness for a bit. The “master” branch is generally not in charge of anything. It’s not like a master recording of which everything else is a copy. It has no special rights and isn’t even necessary more important. It made a limited sort of sense in Linux where torvalds/linux.git’s master branch is the branch that everyone else’s development eventually follows, but my git clone of that is not any sort of master despite being called “master”.