musicmatze 
Alejandra 🔜 Rust In Paris
Nik | Klampfradler 🎸🚲@nik I did not specify that it breaks everyones workflow who is "using rust".
I just said "everyones", leaving out which group I mean by that. 😉
IMO branch renames breaks workflows of users of the repository where the rename happens.
@musicmatze @nik First saying "everyone" and then stating that everyone doesn't even include that big of a group (only people that work with the main rust-lang/rust repo) is a bit disingenuous.
I work regularly with rust-lang/rust and rust-lang/rust-clippy, have half a dozen scripts that point to those repos for fetching.
The fix? A single line diff, `-master +HEAD`, I really don't see the issue or why you should use the rust hashtag and worry people. Rust user's workflows won't be affected a single bit.
Nate Cox“Everyone using rust” is, surprisingly, actually a subset of “everyone”.
laund
Quincy ⁂
chrysn@musicmatze So what, it's just a branch rename, as has happened in many projects.
As long as they take care of any GitHub fallout (autoclosed PRs for lack of target) ... for a user in git, that's well managable.
@musicmatze https://xkcd.com/1172/ ;-)
More seriously: Given how widespread the new default is by now, at some point there's a break-even between breakage from the change and users whose muscle memory needs constant overwriting forcing `master` instead of `main`, esp. when other ma- branches defeat tab complete. That break-even may just as well be now-ish.
@musicmatze `ls --sort time | head -n100 | xargs -n1 sh -c 'cat $0/.git/HEAD' | sort | uniq -c` gives me 45 main and 23 master for projects I touch regularly, and that ratio only gets stronger the less I extend this to ages old projects.
Looks pretty default to me, and the technical git default comes with a big yellow warning "hint: Using 'master' as the name for the initial branch. This default branch name is subject to change.".
Florian@musicmatze @chrysn afaict the plan is to change that default with the next major version (3.0) of git, cf. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/tree/Documentation/BreakingChanges.adoc:
> In new repositories, the default branch name will be `main`. We have been
warning that the default name will change since 675704c74dd (init:
provide useful advice about init.defaultBranch, 2020-12-11).
'main' is also mentioned in the "First-Time Setup" (https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-First-Time-Git-Setup) as an alternative default branch name.
Rasmus Kaj 🎼🦀For an extremely small value of "everyone". Multiple repos I have contributed to have made the change before, and made no inconvenience to me.
Wolf@musicmatze By "workflow" do you mean training your fingers? Or do you mean fixing some scripts? How many build scripts do you have? Even if you have a hundred, that’s five minutes tops with `sd` or maybe `sed`. You never even have to open a file in your editor. So it sounds an awful lot like you are complaining that the value of this change is not worth the inconvenience to you, in spite of how common and easy this change is.
By the way, if it’s training your fingers\m: 'm' 'a' <tab> autocompletes to "master" if that’s what you have, or to "main" if you have that instead.
So it sounds like what you are really saying is that the people behind this change care about the wrong thing. That what they value is unimportant compared to what you value. Is that the foundation of your argument? Is that what you’re saying? Maybe I got this wrong.