Has Github/Microsoft rolled back the master to main switch?

[email protected]

I am a horrible person to work with because I demand from others what I demand of myself.

if it takes me an average of 60 minutes to update each of my 73 repos, rules, and pipelines, and accounting for 25% more time in post pipeline issues; a "simple branch rename change" would cost me an estimated 92 hours of effort. just over 11 days of work.

is it worth the efforts? I think not. would my boss allow me to do it? not only would they not let me do it, they would laugh me out of the building and take my key card.

should I change how things are done from this day forward? let's ask a different way.

what harm could be done by segmenting standard pipeline configurations? new documentation would be needed, then maintained.

then the question becomes what's the best way to maintain two branching strategies? when new devs start, will they understand the nuances between strategy A vs B? what happens when they open PRs for main on a master repo?

so now...a simple name change becomes far FAR more complex when you look past the initial change request.

Also, I'm not a dick. I'm just pragmatic.

[email protected]

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.

[email protected]

I'm not confused but you seem to be. you were the one coming out swinging.

The only statement in your ridiculous rant that has any validity is that of your legacy pipeline configurations.

that was you, yes? you seemed mad. some advice, don't go pissing on people if you don't want to get pissed on.

if branch names are frivolous then why change them at all? why not keep it as master if it doesn't matter? you seem to be conflating two conflicting streams of thought, are you ok?

I'll show the math from another comment I posted just to show the true cost of a "simple change".

if it takes me an average of 60 minutes to update each of my 73 repos, rules, and pipelines, and accounting for 25% more time in post pipeline issues; a "simple branch rename change" would cost me an estimated 92 hours of effort. just over 11 days of work.

btw, that's dedicated work. no other projects get done in those hours.

then we have blowback. things like, updating documentation, training the rest of the team on using main over master, correctly attributing PRs to main over master, updating local scripts that may be referencing master, updating local repos that have master set as origin, etc...

how many hours will a company allot for tech debt? in theory, 10% of the sprint. in practice, 1%.

so now because of a "simple branch rename" we've reduced output, delayed delivery, increased error rates, increased confusion, increased stress. all for what?

a frivolous name of a branch, was it?

I think I'll keep master around. you want to lose your job because you want to waste your time, go for it!

[email protected]

what exactly am I telling on myself with?

[email protected]

I prefer main simply because it faster to type. I propose main branches be renamed to "m"

[email protected]

I don't think that's a good idea it's not descriptive enough in my opinion.

[email protected]

@[email protected]

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

The posts you are replying to ha e been deleted. I'm really currious what they said because we have one vendor who claims to be/is locked into usung "master". This either requires us to write CI that merges main -> master and mirrors master back to main or use master. This can confuse junior devs once or twice, but it is really not an issue. The ONLY time I felt compelled to use master because of this vendor was when working with a group using GitLab. GitLab has a feature called Pull Mirroring that is MUCH more reliable than a pull/mirror action in GitHub that does the same thing, but to use that the branch names had to be the same.

I see both sides of this argument. The master/slave relationship in tech is NOT like masterworks or mastering a craft. It is based on one "owning" the other, but I don't think that allowing technology to work that way is violating its rights. Obviously changing the name doesn't change the behavior and isn't it really only when that behavior is applied to people that we have a problem with it?

I never fully supported the effort required to change, but I've also never written anything in a way it would be difficult to change. I recognize that it could be considered a micro aggression, but it's not like we are going to stop ants or bees from treating other classes as forced labor. Slavery exists. It is bad when applied to people. It accurately describes tech. Changing the name of the master db or branch did NOT free the slaves.

[email protected]

I demand trunk because https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/ is a great branching strategy guide that anyone should read. It also explains how to release code or fix it in a good way.

[email protected]

It defaults to master if your account existed before the change I believe.

At least I had to manually change it.

[email protected]

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

[email protected]

My main branch is called HEAD.

[email protected]

master/slave relationship in tech

Wait, this is a thread about branch names in git. The "master" in question would be more akin to a "master recording" from music, not master/slave software or system architecture.

[email protected]

That you'd be a bad teammate: the kind of person who puts personal preference above what the group has decided and causes problems for no good reason; the kind of person who would insist on indenting with spaces when the whole team has decided to use tabs.

[email protected]

I honestly never saw a problem with master / slave, nor with whitelist / blacklist. It's the same as killing children, forking children, etc, it's computer terminology and not everything means that bad thing that you personally want it to mean.

I'm not politically correct, I live in a real world. Calling a git repository different really isn't doing shit against slavery and it pisses me off that people are going to down vote me on their slavery built iPhone because apparently I like naughty words and you apparently like slavery.

You want to stop racism? Then stop meddling with computer terminology and go out there and actually do something real.

[email protected]

You monster.

[email protected]

I like develop. Sounds nice and indicates things may be unstable.

[email protected]

While it may be true that the master branch is more akin to a master record, not everyone knows the nuance and quite frankly it doesn’t matter, if it makes people uncomfortable then it shouldn’t be a problem to accommodate a simple change, most of the tech world has already done so. Computers used to have a literal slave/master relationship with hardware components and control systems and we moved past that just fine despite still having controllers and actors everywhere.

[email protected]

Honestly I feel like people who had an issue with this were just as much making an issue out of nothing. I personally also think that "master" is just as much a normal and valid name as "main", and to me the rename kinda felt like performative bullshit. But at the same time it's just a name, if it makes people happy I don't really care either. Nowadays I tend to use main, but it's not something I really pay attention to.

[email protected]

Do you speak french too? I'm french myself and we use master for so many normal things. Americans don't get that word right because their langage lost many of its meanings. It's funny to see people get offended just because they misunderstand the etymology of a word

[email protected]

quite frankly it doesn’t matter

In that case, the name of the branch shouldn't matter. Why are you arguing so hard that it does?

Computers used to have a literal slave/master relationship with hardware components and control systems

OK, this part is just utter nonsense.

agnos.is Forums

Has Github/Microsoft rolled back the master to main switch?