So creating a new repo on GitHub, you get a set of getting started steps. They changed the default branchname to “main” from “master” due to its connotations with slavery.

When I create a new repo now, the initial getting started steps recommend creating a branch named “master” as opposed to “main” as it was a while ago.

It’s especially weird since the line git branch -M master is completely unnecessary, since git init still sets you up with a “master” branch.

Disclaimer: I have a bunch of private repos, and my default branchnames are pretty much all “master”.

Is this a recent change?

Edit: Mystery solved, my default branchname is “master”. Thanks [email protected] !

  • @FooBarrington
    link
    English
    23
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I like it, because it forced people not to assume master is the main branch. If something is common enough to almost be a standard, but it’s not actually a standard, it’s just waiting for disaster.

    These assumptions cause unnecessary breakage, but people will make them unless forced not to.

      • @FooBarrington
        link
        English
        31 month ago

        And yet not everyone used to use master, so scripts kept breaking for no good reason.

        Either make it a standard, or stop assuming it’s a standard. De-facto isn’t good enough.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 month ago

          Having a magical standard fairy waive a wand isn’t going to fix scripts, or stop them from breaking.

          • @FooBarrington
            link
            English
            01 month ago

            What? If there’s an actual standard, it will stop scripts from breaking, because the assumption that master is the main branch will always be true.

            • clif
              link
              English
              21 month ago

              I’ll find something else to screw up and cause it to break, don’t worry.