Re: Rename "master" branch to "main" for glibc 2.35 release.

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1377 bytes --]

On 29 Jan 2022 18:33, DJ Delorie via Libc-alpha wrote:
> "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> writes:
> > No alias would be provided for the master branch;
> 
> This would invalidate decades of online documentation in an instant, and
> for that alone I oppose this part of your proposal.

might want to tamper the hyperbole.  glibc hasn't been using git for decades.
i don't recall the exact date, but it seems it's been just about one decade.

what documentation exactly are you concerned about here ?  people linking to
the online git viewer ?  people linking to commits/diffs don't have "master"
in the URI, just the commit id.

> It will also break existing git checkouts, even if you write very clear
> documenation (you did, right? ;) about how to "fix" a checked out master
> branch.

this is making much ado about nothing.  "fixing" a checkout is a single
command to change what branch is being used to merge.  even then, it's not
like the world will explode if someone has to manually fixup their checkout
once.

we can keep the master branch and just delete all content.  replace it with
a file that says "use main".  or something like that.

there's no need to keep "master" redirecting to "main" forever, or really
at all.  plenty of other projects of significantly larger magnitude than
glibc have migrated without doing this.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]