3 ms·
Its not a trivial change, git actually doesn't have an default branch, it is actually just the remote HEAD. And its not possible to git push that information. T
by blueflow 3y ago
Its not a trivial change, git actually doesn't have an default branch, it is actually just the remote HEAD. And its not possible to git push that information. Thats also why all the manuals about changing the "default branch" require setting some select box in the WebUI.
I do maintain a git mirror chain with several pulls/pushes in a row and the whole master/main thing has been a pain in the ass. And both sides in that debate implicitly made that wrong assumption that a "default branch" even exists, which bites me even more.
- orlp 3y agoA default branch absolutely exists, it's what you get when you git init.
- blueflow 3y agoYes, but thats a recent addition and is not related to the git clone behavior that people call "default branch".
- jen20 3y agoAs of git 2.28, it has a setting named “init.defaultBranch”. git config --global init.defaultBranch trunk Is one of the things that people complaining about this kind of thing should do, since the respect for tradition should probably transcending tooling.