Re: Renaming ‘master’ to ‘main’
I use trunk! I think the metaphor is the most accurate, but I'm open to whatever. August 9, 2022 10:01 PM, "Felix Lechner" wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 1:57 PM Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> Yes, this is something we should do. > > For what it's worth, I now use 'history' for primary development > branches when possible. > > For me, it establishes a preeminence among branches by function rather > than name. Plus, I like writing "It was merged into 'history'." > > Kind regards > Felix Lechner
Re: Renaming ‘master’ to ‘main’
Hi, On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 1:57 PM Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Yes, this is something we should do. For what it's worth, I now use 'history' for primary development branches when possible. For me, it establishes a preeminence among branches by function rather than name. Plus, I like writing "It was merged into 'history'." Kind regards Felix Lechner
Re: Renaming ‘master’ to ‘main’
Hi, On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 1:57 PM Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Yes, this is something we should do. For what it's worth, I now use 'history' for primary development branches when possible. To me, it establishes a preeminence among branches by function rather than name. Plus, I like writing "It was merged into 'history'." Kind regards Felix Lechner
Renaming ‘master’ to ‘main’
Vagrant Cascadian skribis: > On 2022-08-06, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: >> On 2022-08-06 20:48, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: >>> guix pull: error: commit 39465409f0481f27d252ce25d2b02d3f5cbc6723 >>> not signed by an authorized key: >>> 2841 9AC6 5038 7440 C7E9 2FFA 2208 D209 58C1 DEB0 >> >> I tried a few other random things to wriggle out of this but I think >> we're stuck (which is, design-wise, probably a good thing). > > What a great opportunity to switch to using "main" instead of "master" > anyways. :) Yes, this is something we should do. There’s preliminary work here: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49252 I eventually lost track of what the problem was, but we should resume. Ludo’.
