(no title)
jeffrallen | 9 days ago
I work at a company that was born and grew during the master->main transition. As a result, we have a 50/50 split of main and master.
No matter what you think about the reason for the transition, any reasonable person must admit that this was a stupid, user hostile, and needlessly complexifying change.
I am a trainer at my company. I literally teach git. And: I have no words.
Every time I decide to NOT explain to a new engineer why it's that way and say, "just learn that some are master, newer ones are main, there's no way to be sure" a little piece of me dies inside.
lazyasciiart|9 days ago
I would say any reasonable person would have to agree that a company which didn't bother to set a standard for new repos once there are multiple common options is stupid, user hostile and needlessly complexifying. And if the company does have a standard for new repos, but for some reason you don't explain that to new engineers....
1718627440|8 days ago
nicoburns|9 days ago
I'm personally a huge fan of the master-> main changejus5t because main is shorter to type. Might be a small win, but I checkout projects' main branches a lot.
Griffinsauce|8 days ago
UqWBcuFx6NV4r|9 days ago
I’d consider yourself lucky that everything else is going so well that this is what’s occupying you.