Renaming master to main
#68
Comments
|
Some discussion on this for Python: https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462 I'm in favor of changing this, but would happily let other projects move first and figure out what breaks :) |
|
I support terminology changes like this. Doing a quick search for terms like We recently had to resolve an issue where Bokeh renamed |
|
I agree that we should make this change. I don't love the idea of making the whitelist/allowlist change backwards compatible unless we have a very short and clearly defined timeline for getting rid of it entirely. Breaking some things might be considered part of the goal for this work. |
Interesting I hadn't considered that. |
|
There hasn't been any activity on
https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462.
Does anyone know of other projects that have made the switch?
…On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:23 AM Jacob Tomlinson ***@***.***> wrote:
Breaking some things might be considered part of the goal for this work.
Interesting I hadn't considered that.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#68 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKAOIWCJ4XE6WCJOVTY5BLR3MRGDANCNFSM4OF3NMQQ>
.
|
|
Other discussions that I could find: Of those it seems only Mozilla has gone ahead with the change already. |
|
Definitely not the same as OSS but we made the change at Saturn and it was pretty seamless. |
|
FYI: https://github.com/github/renaming/.
|
|
FWIW we did just start this, beginning with some peripheral repos, and so far things have been relatively painless. |
|
It was raised in dask/dask#6922 that there are other words such as |
|
I think Github has now implemented all the helper utils for migrating from master to main: https://github.com/github/renaming I am down to help with any work that this change would entail. |
|
I'm also +1 for migrating to FWIW scikit-learn made the switch to |
|
Would probably be good to track this for subprojects in the same way we are doing for the GitHub Actions migration. Also side note I wrote a blog post a while back that folks may find helpful on setting up aliases to check out and pull the default branch. I personally work on projects that use |
|
Progress:
|
|
Quick FYI GitHub helpfully lets you know the default branch has changed and you need to run some commands to update your local clone. However it doesn't mention that you need to head to your fork and rename the default branch there first otherwise those commands will fail.
|
|
Almost all of the repos in the Dask org have either made the migration from |
|
@jacobtomlinson just found that read the docs caches the name of the default branch, so project maintainers may need to verify that the correct branch is being built. I am opening issues to track this now:
|
|
I'm not sure if marketing uses read the docs. |
|
It does and I've pointed RTD to |
|
Ok then I think the list I have above is complete |
|
All branches listed have been updated. Down to the RTD issues listed above. Only a couple people have permissions on those. Tried pinging for help. |
|
Think only dask-glm remains. Suggesting archiving it ( dask/dask-glm#99 ) as it appears inactive Edit: This is now archived |
|
@jakirkham we recently took ownership of crick from Jim. We should rename that too. I can lead that. |
|
Renaming the branch is straightforward. Happy to do that There seem to only be a few references to Edit: Went ahead and renamed the branch |
|
Closing as completed |
Would like to suggest we rename our branches from
mastertomain. The termmastercan be problematic and is something even GitHub themselves is moving away from. Suspect beyond doing the work itself, the change has minimal (if any) long term maintenance associated. Would be interested in hearing others thoughts on this 🙂The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: