Re: [PATCH 00/28] Use main as default branch name

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2020, 05:43 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqima343vb.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20201118024028.GE360414@google.com>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

>> IMHO, though, all of this is orthogonal to question of what the default
>> is. Unless we are thinking the basename thing would work as a default,
>> but I don't think that resolves any of the backwards-compatibility
>> concerns.
>
> If we think it would make sense as the *eventual* default, we could use
>
> 	[init]
> 		defaultBranchName =
>
> (i.e., an empty string) to request it early.

I am not opposed to the idea to invent a notation that asks for the basename behaviour, but I do not think it is a good idea to use "an empty string" for that. I'd rather see us use some consistent naming convention to denote any new "non-constant string" thing.

What Peff suggested is a more viable possibility, for example. When "[init] defaultBranchAlgorithm = <name>" is set, the fixed string "init.defaultBranch" is ignored and the algorithm specified with its name is invoked to come up with a name dynamically. We may start with something like 'dirname' as the only supported algorithm but that way we would avoid painting ourselves in a corner out of which we cannot escape (e.g. we may come up with a better way than the basename thing, and we would not have a good way to give it a name that is easy to use if we wasted "an empty string" for the basename thing).