{"thread":{"id":"55028","subject":"Can git change?","startedAt":"2021-01-22T13:01:20Z","lastAt":"2021-03-10T21:41:12Z","messageCount":12,"participants":["Patricia B. C.","Christian Couder","Junio C Hamano","Martin von Zweigbergk","Johannes Schindelin","Daniel Gruesso"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"414957","messageId":"CAK8LAYVZKjbMEDWTyvQv2eY+qR0qw1=mn=c4KCZvit7gsqTibA@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Can git change?","fromName":"Patricia B. C.","fromEmail":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-01-22T12:59:38Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-22T13:01:20Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Hello!\nMy name is Patricia and I work as a software engineer in Brazil. I\nalso teach sometimes at Le Wagon, a programming school.\nI brought the discussion about changing our repositories' branch to\nmain instead of master. The response of one of the owners was that\n\"Git has not changed it, so we will not change\". So here I was,\nwondering if maybe Git would hear me out :)\nDo you have any thoughts on it?\n\nThank you!\nBest regards,\nPatricia Camiansky.\n"},{"id":"414967","messageId":"CAP8UFD0fZBdZ6qwDP9_yW7VAfskTKPC7HVSpK4rD=bORuECpJA@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"CAK8LAYVZKjbMEDWTyvQv2eY+qR0qw1=mn=c4KCZvit7gsqTibA@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: Can git change?","fromName":"Christian Couder","fromEmail":"christian.couder@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-01-22T13:31:57Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-22T13:33:21Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"christian.couder@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/208954?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 2:05 PM Patricia B. C. wrote:\n>\n> Hello!\n> My name is Patricia and I work as a software engineer in Brazil. I\n> also teach sometimes at Le Wagon, a programming school.\n> I brought the discussion about changing our repositories' branch to\n> main instead of master. The response of one of the owners was that\n> \"Git has not changed it, so we will not change\". So here I was,\n> wondering if maybe Git would hear me out :)\n> Do you have any thoughts on it?\n\nThere have been a lot of discussions about this topic. You can find\nsome pointers to them (though maybe not the most recent ones) in the\narticle \"The history of `master` in Git\" in:\n\nhttps://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/\n\nThere has been also an official statement by the Conservancy and the\nGit PLC (Project Leadership Committee):\n\nhttps://sfconservancy.org/news/2020/jun/23/gitbranchname/\n\nBest,\nChristian.\n"},{"id":"414988","messageId":"xmqqpn1w95dj.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"CAP8UFD0fZBdZ6qwDP9_yW7VAfskTKPC7HVSpK4rD=bORuECpJA@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: Can git change?","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2021-01-22T18:46:32Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-22T19:20:29Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Christian Couder writes:\n\n> Hi,\n>\n> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 2:05 PM Patricia B. C. wrote:\n>>\n>> Hello!\n>> My name is Patricia and I work as a software engineer in Brazil. I\n>> also teach sometimes at Le Wagon, a programming school.\n>> I brought the discussion about changing our repositories' branch to\n>> main instead of master. The response of one of the owners was that\n>> \"Git has not changed it, so we will not change\". So here I was,\n>> wondering if maybe Git would hear me out :)\n>> Do you have any thoughts on it?\n>\n> There have been a lot of discussions about this topic. You can find\n> some pointers to them (though maybe not the most recent ones) in the\n> article \"The history of `master` in Git\" in:\n>\n> https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/\n>\n> There has been also an official statement by the Conservancy and the\n> Git PLC (Project Leadership Committee):\n>\n> https://sfconservancy.org/news/2020/jun/23/gitbranchname/\n\nI got an impression that Patricia wanted to follow what we do to\nthis project, but AFAIU, both of the above are about what Git does\nto help end-user projects to rename. They do not talk about what\nbranch this project uses.\n\nA much more relevant direct reference is the brian's assessment for\nus to switch in Edition 65, plus the test clean-up series from\nDscho.\n\nHaving said all that, imitating what we do to our project may\nprobably not be a good idea. We have done, and we will do in the\nfuture, experimental things, some of which may turn out to be bad\nideas [*1*]. The users are probably better off imitating projects\nwith larger developer base.\n\n\n[Footnote]\n\n*1* subtree merging of gitk and git-gui, for an example, and having\n an octopus merge in the history is another.\n"},{"id":"415017","messageId":"CANiSa6gEJ8ezVLhHf+TkGpqvEwvb8HhqtU3ETKiopjLQj6E_QQ@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"xmqqpn1w95dj.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: Can git change?","fromName":"Martin von Zweigbergk","fromEmail":"martinvonz@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-01-22T22:43:53Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-22T22:45:49Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"martinvonz@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/891642?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 9:39 AM Junio C Hamano wrote:\n>\n> *1* subtree merging of gitk and git-gui, for an example, and having\n> an octopus merge in the history is another.\n\nThis is probably quite off topic for the thread, but I'm curious why\nyou think it was a bad idea to have octopus merges in git.git's\nhistory (there seem to be 37 of them).\n"},{"id":"415030","messageId":"xmqqh7n85qwd.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"CANiSa6gEJ8ezVLhHf+TkGpqvEwvb8HhqtU3ETKiopjLQj6E_QQ@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: Can git change?","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2021-01-23T02:27:30Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-23T02:29:31Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Martin von Zweigbergk writes:\n\n> This is probably quite off topic for the thread, but I'm curious why\n> you think it was a bad idea to have octopus merges in git.git's\n> history (there seem to be 37 of them).\n\nOctoupi in our history, at least the older ones, solve no real life\nproblem; it only gives us \"now we have something cool-looking that\nother people's version control systems never had\", which is of\ndubious value.\n\nAnd their presense makes bisection less efficient than it could be\naround them, which is a real downside.\n"},{"id":"415047","messageId":"CAK8LAYUsebOau+XJ66fEesLm4MfMuxJjse0YL408-2jih1d1eg@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"xmqqh7n85qwd.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Patricia B. C.","fromEmail":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-01-23T12:56:57Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-23T12:57:56Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Hey, thanks for the replies, guys.\n\nYes, as Junio said, my intention was to understand a bit about what\nyou were doing, so thank you for the explanation!\n\nThe idea isn't really to imitate what you are doing, but just to use\nit as a benchmark to show that changing the name of the branch might\nnot seem like an important thing, but it is a global movement that is\nbeing adopted by many renowned developers.\n\nQuoting one of the comments on the discussion topic I raised:\n\n\"It's only the default name for repositories created inside GitHub.\nSince our students only create their repositories locally on their\ncomputers with Git, I don't see how GitHub's decision will affect\nthem. If Git decides to change over from master to main, and there is\nan industry-wide push to adopt this change (which doesn't seem very\nlikely to me), then I might agree with you\"\n\nSo, I just wanted to show that guy that this is an industry-wide push :)\n\n\nBest regards,\nPatricia Camiansky.\n\n\nDe: Junio C Hamano\nEnviado:sexta-feira, 22 de janeiro de 2021 23:27\nPara: Martin von Zweigbergk\nCc:Christian Couder; Patricia B. C.; git\nAssunto: Re: Can git change?\n\n\n\nMartin von Zweigbergk writes:\n\n\n\n> This is probably quite off topic for the thread, but I'm curious why\n\n> you think it was a bad idea to have octopus merges in git.git's\n\n> history (there seem to be 37 of them).\n\n\n\nOctoupi in our history, at least the older ones, solve no real life\n\nproblem; it only gives us \"now we have something cool-looking that\n\nother people's version control systems never had\", which is of\n\ndubious value.\n\n\n\nAnd their presense makes bisection less efficient than it could be\n\naround them, which is a real downside.\n"},{"id":"415193","messageId":"nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2101251650150.57@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"CAK8LAYUsebOau+XJ66fEesLm4MfMuxJjse0YL408-2jih1d1eg@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2021-01-25T16:28:46Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-25T16:30:57Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi Patricia,\n\nOn Sat, 23 Jan 2021, Patricia B. C. wrote:\n\n> Yes, as Junio said, my intention was to understand a bit about what\n> you were doing, so thank you for the explanation!\n>\n> The idea isn't really to imitate what you are doing, but just to use\n> it as a benchmark to show that changing the name of the branch might\n> not seem like an important thing, but it is a global movement that is\n> being adopted by many renowned developers.\n\nFWIW Git for Windows switched all of its repositories to use `main` as\ndefault branch name: its git/git fork, the build-extra, MINGW-packages,\nMSYS2-packages, git-sdk-32, git-sdk-64, git-for-windows.github.io,\nmsys2-runtime, busybox-w32 and WinToast repositories:\n\n\thttps://github.com/git-for-windows/\n\n> Quoting one of the comments on the discussion topic I raised:\n>\n> \"It's only the default name for repositories created inside GitHub.\n> Since our students only create their repositories locally on their\n> computers with Git, I don't see how GitHub's decision will affect\n> them. If Git decides to change over from master to main, and there is\n> an industry-wide push to adopt this change (which doesn't seem very\n> likely to me), then I might agree with you\"\n\nAny repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\nLikewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\nsome stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\nversion (I am working toward that goal).\n\nAnd I have to admit that I am somewhat concerned about your students if\none of their instructors thinks that their education shouldn't prepare\nthem for more than working locally on their computers. Aren't they at all\ninterested in preparing the students for life after university? If so,\nthey will most certainly be affected by GitHub's decision.\n\n> So, I just wanted to show that guy that this is an industry-wide push :)\n\nMaybe Git itself is not a good example for that. Bigger projects face\ndramatically bigger challenges replacing the default branch name because\nof the short term disruption caused by it. Nevertheless, a growing number\nof projects have already renamed their default branch, such as Snowpack\n(https://github.com/snowpackjs/snowpack) and the react-refresh webpack\nplugin (https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin) but also\nbigger ones such as LLVM (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project).\n\nCiao,\nJohannes\n"},{"id":"415280","messageId":"CAK8LAYVp0XtdFbnVB6fzpje5a3RkU6+pFW81VpCFBPMe46m7fw@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"xmqqft2owjb9.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Patricia B. C.","fromEmail":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-01-26T12:32:05Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-26T12:33:43Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pati.camsky@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Hey!\nThank you very much, guys, for the detailed explanation, I will bring\nthose points to the discussion topic :D\nI do agree with you that we should prepare the students for \"real\nworld\" projects and not only working locally.\nHopefully, there will be more people who agree with me than people who\nwant to stick with the old fashioned way :)\n\nThanks again!\nPatricia Camiansky.\n\nEm seg., 25 de jan. de 2021 às 22:58, Junio C Hamano\n escreveu:\n>\n> Johannes Schindelin writes:\n>\n> > And I have to admit that I am somewhat concerned about your students if\n> > one of their instructors thinks that their education shouldn't prepare\n> > them for more than working locally on their computers. Aren't they at all\n> > interested in preparing the students for life after university? If so,\n> > they will most certainly be affected by GitHub's decision.\n>\n> GitHub's decision will most affect projects that haven't started\n> yet, simply because they won't have to incur any \"transition\" cost\n> the existing projects may have to consider. And given enough time,\n> old projects die out and there will be more new projects than the\n> projects we currently have, hopefully.\n>\n> Until that happens, they would be affected more by decision by the\n> projects they interact with, as it is most convenient if your local\n> name matches the name the upstream uses. And the versions of Git\n> way before people started talking about 'master' and 'main' have\n> long been prepared for that, and we've been closing possible gaps in\n> the recent versions. \"git clone\" would notice what name the upstream\n> uses and uses the same name locally.\n>\n> Even when they work locally, they'll start getting 'main' from their\n> Git soon, and that would become consistent with the name that their\n> \"upstream\" projects are likely to choose due to this \"industry wide\"\n> push.\n>\n>\n> > Any repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\n> > Likewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\n> > some stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> > version (I am working toward that goal).\n> > ...\n> > Maybe Git itself is not a good example for that. Bigger projects face\n> > dramatically bigger challenges replacing the default branch name because\n> > of the short term disruption caused by it. Nevertheless, a growing number\n> > of projects have already renamed their default branch, such as Snowpack\n> > (https://github.com/snowpackjs/snowpack) and the react-refresh webpack\n> > plugin (https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin) but also\n> > bigger ones such as LLVM (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project).\n>\n> Yes, thanks for giving Patricia and likeminded souls more usable\n> ammunition than just us ;-)\n"},{"id":"415317","messageId":"xmqqft2owjb9.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2101251650150.57@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2021-01-26T01:58:18Z","receivedAt":"2021-01-26T20:46:33Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Johannes Schindelin writes:\n\n> And I have to admit that I am somewhat concerned about your students if\n> one of their instructors thinks that their education shouldn't prepare\n> them for more than working locally on their computers. Aren't they at all\n> interested in preparing the students for life after university? If so,\n> they will most certainly be affected by GitHub's decision.\n\nGitHub's decision will most affect projects that haven't started\nyet, simply because they won't have to incur any \"transition\" cost\nthe existing projects may have to consider. And given enough time,\nold projects die out and there will be more new projects than the\nprojects we currently have, hopefully.\n\nUntil that happens, they would be affected more by decision by the\nprojects they interact with, as it is most convenient if your local\nname matches the name the upstream uses. And the versions of Git\nway before people started talking about 'master' and 'main' have\nlong been prepared for that, and we've been closing possible gaps in\nthe recent versions. \"git clone\" would notice what name the upstream\nuses and uses the same name locally.\n\nEven when they work locally, they'll start getting 'main' from their\nGit soon, and that would become consistent with the name that their\n\"upstream\" projects are likely to choose due to this \"industry wide\"\npush.\n\n\n> Any repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\n> Likewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\n> some stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> version (I am working toward that goal).\n> ...\n> Maybe Git itself is not a good example for that. Bigger projects face\n> dramatically bigger challenges replacing the default branch name because\n> of the short term disruption caused by it. Nevertheless, a growing number\n> of projects have already renamed their default branch, such as Snowpack\n> (https://github.com/snowpackjs/snowpack) and the react-refresh webpack\n> plugin (https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin) but also\n> bigger ones such as LLVM (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project).\n\nYes, thanks for giving Patricia and likeminded souls more usable\nammunition than just us ;-)\n"},{"id":"418591","messageId":"CAFdpPnBUuN0VJ7YBbpb04e-SCK4DXCJ_-CRxMOB=E8fKZZCmhw@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"xmqqft2owjb9.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Daniel Gruesso","fromEmail":"daniel.gruesso@gmail.com","sentAt":"2021-03-09T14:54:06Z","receivedAt":"2021-03-09T14:55:19Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"daniel.gruesso@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Johannes Schindelin writes:\n\n> Any repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\n> Likewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\n> some stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> version (I am working toward that goal).\n\nGitLab product person here, we are indeed planning to change this in\nour next major release 14.0, shipping on 2021-05-22.\n\nWhat is the tentative timeline for `git init` to change in default to\n`main` in the Git project? It would go a long way for the git\ncommunity.\n\n\nThanks,\n\n\nDaniel Gruesso\nOn Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 5:38 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:\n>\n> Johannes Schindelin writes:\n>\n> > And I have to admit that I am somewhat concerned about your students if\n> > one of their instructors thinks that their education shouldn't prepare\n> > them for more than working locally on their computers. Aren't they at all\n> > interested in preparing the students for life after university? If so,\n> > they will most certainly be affected by GitHub's decision.\n>\n> GitHub's decision will most affect projects that haven't started\n> yet, simply because they won't have to incur any \"transition\" cost\n> the existing projects may have to consider. And given enough time,\n> old projects die out and there will be more new projects than the\n> projects we currently have, hopefully.\n>\n> Until that happens, they would be affected more by decision by the\n> projects they interact with, as it is most convenient if your local\n> name matches the name the upstream uses. And the versions of Git\n> way before people started talking about 'master' and 'main' have\n> long been prepared for that, and we've been closing possible gaps in\n> the recent versions. \"git clone\" would notice what name the upstream\n> uses and uses the same name locally.\n>\n> Even when they work locally, they'll start getting 'main' from their\n> Git soon, and that would become consistent with the name that their\n> \"upstream\" projects are likely to choose due to this \"industry wide\"\n> push.\n>\n>\n> > Any repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\n> > Likewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\n> > some stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> > version (I am working toward that goal).\n> > ...\n> > Maybe Git itself is not a good example for that. Bigger projects face\n> > dramatically bigger challenges replacing the default branch name because\n> > of the short term disruption caused by it. Nevertheless, a growing number\n> > of projects have already renamed their default branch, such as Snowpack\n> > (https://github.com/snowpackjs/snowpack) and the react-refresh webpack\n> > plugin (https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin) but also\n> > bigger ones such as LLVM (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project).\n>\n> Yes, thanks for giving Patricia and likeminded souls more usable\n> ammunition than just us ;-)\n"},{"id":"418738","messageId":"nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2103101038170.50@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"CAFdpPnBG==5L6hwH6h2JTFtYVQqLZUcCi4+wzL_cpKKg_X3yoA@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2021-03-10T21:03:29Z","receivedAt":"2021-03-10T21:04:29Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi Daniel,\n\nOn Mon, 8 Mar 2021, Daniel Gruesso wrote:\n\n> Johannes, based on the comments found in\n> https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqa6vf437i.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com, I was\n> under the impression Git 2.31.0 would ship with 'main' as the default.\n> Surprised to see that's likely not the case.\n\nThat was the intention of that iteration of the patch series, but it was\npointed out that we need a much longer time frame to let Git users get\nused to the idea that the default branch name is subject to change.\n\nNote also that you're linking to Junio's reply, and in the end it matters\nmore what Junio's intention is than what _my_ intention is.\n\nFor now, we do have that advice that's given when you run `git init`. This\nhas been shipped as part of v2.30.0, IIRC. That is, if you run `git init`\nwithout setting `init.defaultBranch`, Git will tell you this:\n\n Using 'master' as the name for the initial branch. This default branch name\n is subject to change. To configure the initial branch name to use in all\n of your new repositories, which will suppress this warning, call:\n\n \tgit config --global init.defaultBranch \n\n Names commonly chosen instead of 'master' are 'main', 'trunk' and\n 'development'. The just-created branch can be renamed via this command:\n\n \tgit branch -m \n\nI guess that something like 6 months of a \"deprecation period\" (i.e. the\ntime to keep `master` as the default) _might_ be enough, so we could\npotentially move forward with changing the default around end of May (by\nmy calculation, v2.32.0 should be due around May 24th, that might be a\ngood candidate to target).\n\n> > ...also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> > version (I am working toward that goal).\n>\n> Where can we follow these changes and what version of Git should we expect\n> to contain the change?\n\nUnfortunately, I do not have any such link for you. As to what Git version\nto expect it to be in: I don't know. That's Junio's call, I guess. Oh, and\nI still need to write all those patches.\n\nCiao,\nJohannes\n\n>\n>\n> Thanks for all you do.\n>\n>\n>\n> Daniel\n>\n> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:33 AM Johannes Schindelin <\n> Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:\n>\n> > Hi Patricia,\n> >\n> > On Sat, 23 Jan 2021, Patricia B. C. wrote:\n> >\n> > > Yes, as Junio said, my intention was to understand a bit about what\n> > > you were doing, so thank you for the explanation!\n> > >\n> > > The idea isn't really to imitate what you are doing, but just to use\n> > > it as a benchmark to show that changing the name of the branch might\n> > > not seem like an important thing, but it is a global movement that is\n> > > being adopted by many renowned developers.\n> >\n> > FWIW Git for Windows switched all of its repositories to use `main` as\n> > default branch name: its git/git fork, the build-extra, MINGW-packages,\n> > MSYS2-packages, git-sdk-32, git-sdk-64, git-for-windows.github.io,\n> > msys2-runtime, busybox-w32 and WinToast repositories:\n> >\n> > https://github.com/git-for-windows/\n> >\n> > > Quoting one of the comments on the discussion topic I raised:\n> > >\n> > > \"It's only the default name for repositories created inside GitHub.\n> > > Since our students only create their repositories locally on their\n> > > computers with Git, I don't see how GitHub's decision will affect\n> > > them. If Git decides to change over from master to main, and there is\n> > > an industry-wide push to adopt this change (which doesn't seem very\n> > > likely to me), then I might agree with you\"\n> >\n> > Any repository created on GitHub will have that branch name by default.\n> > Likewise on Azure DevOps. I fully expect the other hosters to follow at\n> > some stage, and also for `git init` to change the default in a future\n> > version (I am working toward that goal).\n> >\n> > And I have to admit that I am somewhat concerned about your students if\n> > one of their instructors thinks that their education shouldn't prepare\n> > them for more than working locally on their computers. Aren't they at all\n> > interested in preparing the students for life after university? If so,\n> > they will most certainly be affected by GitHub's decision.\n> >\n> > > So, I just wanted to show that guy that this is an industry-wide push :)\n> >\n> > Maybe Git itself is not a good example for that. Bigger projects face\n> > dramatically bigger challenges replacing the default branch name because\n> > of the short term disruption caused by it. Nevertheless, a growing number\n> > of projects have already renamed their default branch, such as Snowpack\n> > (https://github.com/snowpackjs/snowpack) and the react-refresh webpack\n> > plugin (https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin) but also\n> > bigger ones such as LLVM (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project).\n> >\n> > Ciao,\n> > Johannes\n> >\n>\n"},{"id":"418740","messageId":"xmqqy2euit74.fsf@gitster.g","threadId":"55028","inReplyTo":"nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2103101038170.50@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet","subject":"Re: RES: Can git change?","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2021-03-10T21:39:59Z","receivedAt":"2021-03-10T21:41:12Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Johannes Schindelin writes:\n\n> I guess that something like 6 months of a \"deprecation period\" (i.e. the\n> time to keep `master` as the default) _might_ be enough, so we could\n> potentially move forward with changing the default around end of May (by\n> my calculation, v2.32.0 should be due around May 24th, that might be a\n> good candidate to target).\n\nYou are apparently more ambitious and risk tolerant than I am. I\nwas expecting it to be more towards the end of the year myself.\n\nAnd we already made sure that it would be easy to interact with\nprojects by using the same primary branch name as the upstream\nproject uses when cloning; hopefully by the time we change the\nbuilt-in hardcoded fallback default, it would not have much impact\nto the real life usability than it is a symbolic act.\n\n"}]}