Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Violeta Georgieva]

На пт, 26.06.2020 г. в 23:41 Rémy Maucherat  написа:
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 4:48 PM Mark Thomas  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Picking up this thread again I see a range of views. "main" seems to be
>> the most popular although several folks suggested "10.0.x" and "use
>> whatever GitHub use". There was also interest in "trunk". Particularly
>> with the additional suggestion of "10.0.x" appearing in the middle of
>> the discussion, I'm not sure where consensus lies at the moment.
>
>
> I was used to trunk :)

It seems GitHub has some plans for the renaming
https://github.com/github/renaming

Violeta

>
> Rémy
>
>>
>>
>> One suggestion I particularly liked was to do the rename at the point we
>> branch 10.0.x and start on 10.1.x since we will need to be updating CI
>> and various things anyway. That is currently looking like September as
>> that is the target date for the Jakarta EE 9 release.
>>
>> I suspect that this could get tricky as I'd prefer "main" or "10.0.x",
>> could work with "trunk" but really don't want to continue with "master".
>> I imagine others have similar views in different combinations. Maybe if
>> others express their views in a similar way to the above we'll end up
>> with a natural consensus. If not, we'll have to figure something out.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> On 19/06/2020 16:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> > Le 16/06/2020 à 10:02, Mark Thomas a écrit :
>> >
>> >> Thoughts?
>> >
>> > I'd prefer the status-quo and keep "master", I've always understood
this
>> > as the 'master record' (I know it might be historically wrong) and I
>> > haven't seen evidences it has ever offended or deterred anyone from
>> > contributing.
>> >
>> > If there is a consensus to change I suggest waiting to see what GitHub
>> > plans to do. The "master" name is a de-facto standard for Git
>> > repositories, and I think we should remain consistent with the new name
>> > that will be popularized by GitHub.
>> >
>> > That said, I have a preference for "main".
>> >
>> > Emmanuel Bourg
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>> >
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Rémy Maucherat]

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 4:48 PM Mark Thomas  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Picking up this thread again I see a range of views. "main" seems to be
> the most popular although several folks suggested "10.0.x" and "use
> whatever GitHub use". There was also interest in "trunk". Particularly
> with the additional suggestion of "10.0.x" appearing in the middle of
> the discussion, I'm not sure where consensus lies at the moment.
>

I was used to trunk :)

Rémy


>
> One suggestion I particularly liked was to do the rename at the point we
> branch 10.0.x and start on 10.1.x since we will need to be updating CI
> and various things anyway. That is currently looking like September as
> that is the target date for the Jakarta EE 9 release.
>
> I suspect that this could get tricky as I'd prefer "main" or "10.0.x",
> could work with "trunk" but really don't want to continue with "master".
> I imagine others have similar views in different combinations. Maybe if
> others express their views in a similar way to the above we'll end up
> with a natural consensus. If not, we'll have to figure something out.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On 19/06/2020 16:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> > Le 16/06/2020 à 10:02, Mark Thomas a écrit :
> >
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> > I'd prefer the status-quo and keep "master", I've always understood this
> > as the 'master record' (I know it might be historically wrong) and I
> > haven't seen evidences it has ever offended or deterred anyone from
> > contributing.
> >
> > If there is a consensus to change I suggest waiting to see what GitHub
> > plans to do. The "master" name is a de-facto standard for Git
> > repositories, and I think we should remain consistent with the new name
> > that will be popularized by GitHub.
> >
> > That said, I have a preference for "main".
> >
> > Emmanuel Bourg
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Christopher Schultz]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Mark,

On 6/26/20 10:48, Mark Thomas wrote:
> Picking up this thread again I see a range of views. "main" seems
> to be the most popular although several folks suggested "10.0.x"
> and "use whatever GitHub use". There was also interest in "trunk".
> Particularly with the additional suggestion of "10.0.x" appearing
> in the middle of the discussion, I'm not sure where consensus lies
> at the moment.
>
> One suggestion I particularly liked was to do the rename at the
> point we branch 10.0.x and start on 10.1.x since we will need to be
> updating CI and various things anyway. That is currently looking
> like September as that is the target date for the Jakarta EE 9
> release.
>
> I suspect that this could get tricky as I'd prefer "main" or
> "10.0.x", could work with "trunk" but really don't want to continue
> with "master". I imagine others have similar views in different
> combinations. Maybe if others express their views in a similar way
> to the above we'll end up with a natural consensus. If not, we'll
> have to figure something out.

I understand the motivation to use more inclusive language, but IMO in
the absence of the word "slave", this "master" branch is more
analogous to a "master copy" of an artifact (usually recording) and
reflects the true etymology of the term, here.

If it's more convenient to make this change in September, then let's
wait until then. Changing twice doesn't really help anybody and causes
a certain amount of chaos.

- -chris

> On 19/06/2020 16:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Le 16/06/2020 à 10:02, Mark Thomas a écrit :
>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I'd prefer the status-quo and keep "master", I've always
>> understood this as the 'master record' (I know it might be
>> historically wrong) and I haven't seen evidences it has ever
>> offended or deterred anyone from contributing.
>>
>> If there is a consensus to change I suggest waiting to see what
>> GitHub plans to do. The "master" name is a de-facto standard for
>> Git repositories, and I think we should remain consistent with
>> the new name that will be popularized by GitHub.
>>
>> That said, I have a preference for "main".
>>
>> Emmanuel Bourg
>>
>> -
>>
>>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>
>
> -
>
>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - https://www.enigmail.net/
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=l8h0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Mark Thomas]

Hi,

Picking up this thread again I see a range of views. "main" seems to be
the most popular although several folks suggested "10.0.x" and "use
whatever GitHub use". There was also interest in "trunk". Particularly
with the additional suggestion of "10.0.x" appearing in the middle of
the discussion, I'm not sure where consensus lies at the moment.

One suggestion I particularly liked was to do the rename at the point we
branch 10.0.x and start on 10.1.x since we will need to be updating CI
and various things anyway. That is currently looking like September as
that is the target date for the Jakarta EE 9 release.

I suspect that this could get tricky as I'd prefer "main" or "10.0.x",
could work with "trunk" but really don't want to continue with "master".
I imagine others have similar views in different combinations. Maybe if
others express their views in a similar way to the above we'll end up
with a natural consensus. If not, we'll have to figure something out.

Mark



On 19/06/2020 16:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 16/06/2020 à 10:02, Mark Thomas a écrit :
> 
>> Thoughts?
> 
> I'd prefer the status-quo and keep "master", I've always understood this
> as the 'master record' (I know it might be historically wrong) and I
> haven't seen evidences it has ever offended or deterred anyone from
> contributing.
> 
> If there is a consensus to change I suggest waiting to see what GitHub
> plans to do. The "master" name is a de-facto standard for Git
> repositories, and I think we should remain consistent with the new name
> that will be popularized by GitHub.
> 
> That said, I have a preference for "main".
> 
> Emmanuel Bourg
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Le 16/06/2020 à 10:02, Mark Thomas a écrit :

> Thoughts?

I'd prefer the status-quo and keep "master", I've always understood this
as the 'master record' (I know it might be historically wrong) and I
haven't seen evidences it has ever offended or deterred anyone from
contributing.

If there is a consensus to change I suggest waiting to see what GitHub
plans to do. The "master" name is a de-facto standard for Git
repositories, and I think we should remain consistent with the new name
that will be popularized by GitHub.

That said, I have a preference for "main".

Emmanuel Bourg

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Christopher Schultz]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Mark,

On 6/16/20 04:02, Mark Thomas wrote:
> All,
>
> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside
> the ASF about the user of "master" as the name of the default git
> branch. If you haven't, the short version is that the name can be
> traced back to master/slave and its associations with human
> slavery.
>
> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the
> master branch in all of the project repositories.

+1

> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>
> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS
> projects will be switching to
>
> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and
> the ASF

I'm not picky about the name, but perhaps there is an opportunity, here.

Historically, trunk/master is where new development has been done, and
releases of the current-latest version of Tomcat are released directly
from that branch. Perhaps we could be more clear in that our new
development branch is 10.whatever and not trunk/main/master/foo which
just happens to cut releases called 10.x from it?

Perhaps I am suggesting that we have main/trunk *and* 10.x but I
haven't really thought it out.

> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to
> $new_branch

A short set of instructions post-migration would be very helpful for me.

- -chris
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - https://www.enigmail.net/
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=xOny
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Konstantin Kolinko]

вт, 16 июн. 2020 г. в 11:02, Mark Thomas :
>
> All,
>
> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>
> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
> branch in all of the project repositories.
>
> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>
> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>  will be switching to
>
> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>   ASF
>
> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
> Other suggestions welcome.

1. My preference is for "trunk". To come back where it was for many
years. It is a well known name that we used for a long time.

2.  I do not like following the hype.
I think a better moment to do a rename will be when 10.0.x is branched
off as a separate branch. That is when some CI servers will have to be
reconfigured.

I think that will be about the time when 7.0.x reaches EOL, end of March 2021.

http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-70-eol.html

> This may help for the gradual migration
> https://github.com/chancancode/branch-rename/#gradual-migration

Looking at "Gradual Migration" strategy there, I wonder if maybe we
could create a "10.0.x" branch now (using it as the new name, as
suggested by Martin Grigorov).


BTW, one step is missing there: one has to update the 'HEAD' ref in
Git repository. It is a symbolic reference. GitHub does not show the
file, but it can be seen at gitbox .

https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat.git/HEAD

Best regards,
Kostantin Kolinko

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi,

Do you know if there would be a redirect of existing PR and "existing"
references to master or does it break the ecosystem for a while - if so I'm
not sure it is worth it ?
If it does not break anything "latest" does not sound that bad and likely
avoids this superior/inferior thought people can have as with master or
main and it sounds more modern than trunk ;).

Indeed, just my 2 cents ;).

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mar. 16 juin 2020 à 17:36, Martin Grigorov  a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:02 AM Mark Thomas  wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
>> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
>> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
>> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>>
>> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
>> branch in all of the project repositories.
>>
>> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>>
>> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>>  will be switching to
>>
>> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>>   ASF
>>
>> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
>> Other suggestions welcome.
>>
>> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
>> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
>> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>>
>> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
>> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>>
>> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
>> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
>> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
>> open PRs that is easily done.
>>
>> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
>> relatively simple.
>>
>> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>>
>> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>>
>> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
>> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
>> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> I, personally, do not see any relation between technical nomenclature and
> social problems in real life.
> I have many colored skin friends and colleagues and I've never heard
> anyone making such associations.
> I am Bulgarian. Until not so long ago we were ruled for 5 centuries by
> Ottomans but I do not feel like a slave and I don't find 'master' branch
> name anyhow related to slavery.
> I am -0 on such change and any other change that comes from politics.
>
> But if we are going to change the branch name then I suggest '10.0.x'.
> This way it will be consistent with all other branches.
>
> Martin
>
>
>> Mark
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Martin Grigorov]

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:02 AM Mark Thomas  wrote:

> All,
>
> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>
> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
> branch in all of the project repositories.
>
> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>
> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>  will be switching to
>
> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>   ASF
>
> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
> Other suggestions welcome.
>
> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>
> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>
> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
> open PRs that is easily done.
>
> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
> relatively simple.
>
> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>
> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>
> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>
> Thoughts?
>

I, personally, do not see any relation between technical nomenclature and
social problems in real life.
I have many colored skin friends and colleagues and I've never heard anyone
making such associations.
I am Bulgarian. Until not so long ago we were ruled for 5 centuries by
Ottomans but I do not feel like a slave and I don't find 'master' branch
name anyhow related to slavery.
I am -0 on such change and any other change that comes from politics.

But if we are going to change the branch name then I suggest '10.0.x'. This
way it will be consistent with all other branches.

Martin


> Mark
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Raymond Auge]

+1 for main

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 8:00 AM Coty Sutherland  wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 4:02 AM Mark Thomas  wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
>> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
>> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
>> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>>
>> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
>> branch in all of the project repositories.
>>
>> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>>
>> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>>  will be switching to
>>
>> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>>   ASF
>>
>> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
>> Other suggestions welcome.
>>
>> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
>> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
>> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>>
>> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
>> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>>
>> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
>> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
>> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
>> open PRs that is easily done.
>>
>> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
>> relatively simple.
>>
>> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>>
>> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>>
>> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
>> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
>> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> I'm +1 for main
>
>
>> Mark
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>

-- 
*Raymond Augé* 
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* 
 (@Liferay)

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Coty Sutherland]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 4:02 AM Mark Thomas  wrote:

> All,
>
> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>
> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
> branch in all of the project repositories.
>
> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>
> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>  will be switching to
>
> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>   ASF
>
> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
> Other suggestions welcome.
>
> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>
> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>
> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
> open PRs that is easily done.
>
> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
> relatively simple.
>
> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>
> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>
> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>
> Thoughts?
>

I'm +1 for main


> Mark
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Michael Osipov]

Am 2020-06-16 um 12:09 schrieb Mark Thomas:

On 16/06/2020 10:25, Michael Osipov wrote:

Am 2020-06-16 um 10:02 schrieb Mark Thomas:

All,

You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
master/slave and its associations with human slavery.

I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
branch in all of the project repositories.

I think there are two front runners for the new name:

- main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
   will be switching to

- trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
    ASF

Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
Other suggestions welcome.

Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
easier for new community members to find their way around the project.

In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.

Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
open PRs that is easily done.

CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
relatively simple.

Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).

Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch

Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.

Thoughts?


Although on the Git ML this has been discussed that master comes from
Master Copy (music, recoding, etc) and is not related to slavery, I
prefer the term "main" as many other projects now do.


It isn't that clear cut. If you trace it back there are places where
branches are referred to as master and slave as well as places where the
master record idea is used. Various references can be found in this thread:

https://twitter.com/tobie/status/1270290278029631489


Indeed, this one is the worst: 
https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask#L290-L291



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Mark Thomas]

On 16/06/2020 10:25, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2020-06-16 um 10:02 schrieb Mark Thomas:
>> All,
>>
>> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
>> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
>> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
>> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>>
>> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
>> branch in all of the project repositories.
>>
>> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>>
>> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>>   will be switching to
>>
>> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>>    ASF
>>
>> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
>> Other suggestions welcome.
>>
>> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
>> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
>> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>>
>> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
>> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>>
>> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
>> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
>> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
>> open PRs that is easily done.
>>
>> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
>> relatively simple.
>>
>> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>>
>> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>>
>> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
>> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
>> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>>
>> Thoughts?
> 
> Although on the Git ML this has been discussed that master comes from
> Master Copy (music, recoding, etc) and is not related to slavery, I
> prefer the term "main" as many other projects now do.

It isn't that clear cut. If you trace it back there are places where
branches are referred to as master and slave as well as places where the
master record idea is used. Various references can be found in this thread:

https://twitter.com/tobie/status/1270290278029631489

Mark

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Michael Osipov]

Am 2020-06-16 um 10:02 schrieb Mark Thomas:

All,

You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
master/slave and its associations with human slavery.

I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
branch in all of the project repositories.

I think there are two front runners for the new name:

- main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
  will be switching to

- trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
   ASF

Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
Other suggestions welcome.

Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
easier for new community members to find their way around the project.

In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.

Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
open PRs that is easily done.

CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
relatively simple.

Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).

Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch

Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.

Thoughts?


Although on the Git ML this has been discussed that master comes from 
Master Copy (music, recoding, etc) and is not related to slavery, I 
prefer the term "main" as many other projects now do.


M

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Violeta Georgieva]

На вт, 16.06.2020 г. в 11:02 Mark Thomas  написа:
>
> All,
>
> You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
> about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
> haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
> master/slave and its associations with human slavery.
>
> I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
> branch in all of the project repositories.
>
> I think there are two front runners for the new name:
>
> - main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
>  will be switching to
>
> - trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
>   ASF
>
> Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
> Other suggestions welcome.
>
> Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
> the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
> easier for new community members to find their way around the project.
>
> In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
> really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.
>
> Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
> that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
> use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
> open PRs that is easily done.
>
> CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
> relatively simple.
>
> Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).
>
> Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch
>
> Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
> doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
> something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.
>
> Thoughts?


This may help for the gradual migration
https://github.com/chancancode/branch-rename/#gradual-migration

Regards,
Violeta

Changing the name of the default branch in our git repos

[Mark Thomas]

All,

You may have seen the recent discussions both inside and outside the ASF
about the user of "master" as the name of the default git branch. If you
haven't, the short version is that the name can be traced back to
master/slave and its associations with human slavery.

I'd like to propose that the Apache Tomcat project renames the master
branch in all of the project repositories.

I think there are two front runners for the new name:

- main - this looks to be the name GitHub and a number of OSS projects
 will be switching to

- trunk - reflects the Subversion heritage of both the project and the
  ASF

Other options I have seen suggested include "default", "dev", "develop".
Other suggestions welcome.

Personally, I am leaning towards main as that looks to be the choice of
the majority and using the majority choice will make it (a little bit)
easier for new community members to find their way around the project.

In terms of impact, changing the name is going to break stuff. It is
really creating a new branch and deleting the old one.

Deleting a branch triggers the automatic closure of github PRs against
that branch. However if we create "$new_branch" we can edit the PRs to
use "$new_branch" before we delete master. Given the small number of
open PRs that is easily done.

CI systems will need to be updated (buildbot, gump). That should be
relatively simple.

Docs will need to be updated (relatively simple).

Committers and contributors will rebase any local branches to $new_branch

Having thought about what is involved, renaming the default branch
doesn't look as problematic as I thought it might be. This looks like
something that could be done in around an hour for all our repos.

Thoughts?

Mark

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org