It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        can you point where ANYTHING is recommended at all there?

        Cause it simply says that you can change the name. But “master” is the default. That doesn’t sound like a “recommendation” at all. But just making people aware since some repositories try to force things like “Main”. Almost like the repo you’re using might be enforcing shit that Git in of itself doesn’t give a shit about.

        • Sinthesis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          which will suppress this warning

          “I’m going to be annoying you until you do something about it” It is recommending that you take some sort of action, that choice is up to you as the user. In fact, the older way of disabling the warning was called advice.defaultBranchName

          AFAIK git is still Linus Trovalds’ project and one thing he is known for is “you dont fuckin break user space”. That is acknowledged in the pull request https://github.com/git/git/pull/921

          “will minimize disruption for Git’s users and will include appropriate deprecation periods”.

          Linus is also a fuck-your-feelings kind of guy so deprecation_period == linus_date_of_death. No, I’m not implying Linus is racist/bigot, just that he feels that strongly about breaking user experience.

          Git in of itself doesn’t give a shit about.

          You’re right…and that’s why its unbelievable to me how some people are still (it has been nearly 4 years since that PR above) resistant to change this one little thing. This is just the initial branch that we’re talking about here. Git doesn’t care if you:

          ﬌ git init
          Initialized empty Git repository in /home/xxxxxx/tmp/.git/
          
          ﬌ touch foo && git add foo && git commit -am "foo"
          [main (root-commit) 9c74dd1] foo
           1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
           create mode 100644 foo
          
          ﬌ git branch -a            
          * main
          
          ﬌ git checkout -b bar
          Switched to a new branch 'bar'
          
          ﬌ git branch -d main
          Deleted branch main (was 9c74dd1).
          
          ﬌ git branch -a
          * bar
          
          ﬌ git log      
          commit 9c74dd18d493fec727e6ce9e4ba71ed356dd970d (HEAD -> bar)
          Author: Butters
          Date:   Thu Aug 22 00:14:44 2024 -0400
          
              foo
          
          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            “I’m going to be annoying you until you do something about it”

            You call that annoying? Annoying would be not functioning at all unless you choose an choice… or even worse. Go the Github route and specifically force you to use anything other than master.

            Git doesn’t care if you:

            Right… So why are you attributing Github = Git… When It’s clear that’s not the case.