Release
No one messes with release for the "final" merge?
After that... Main.
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo
in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
Release
No one messes with release for the "final" merge?
After that... Main.
Catch and Kill. Trap and Release. It's slavery all over again! We must fight back!
Personally I've come to hate main because it breaks habits easily. I'm working 75% of the time on master repos, but then I might need to do a quick edit on a main repo and suddenly my git checkout master doesn't work.
Or even copy pasting scripts from one project to another can easily break if you forget to change the branch
The reason behind the change is pretty stupid anyway (I'm against slavery but it shouldn't be treated like a slur still)
I honestly donβt know, and Iβm not at my PC to check. I assume itβs main, but with my ADHD Iβve never actually paid attention to that. All I ever remember are my branch names.
Eh, I mix and match them..
My repos use main because i guess that was the default, but i don't really care. I mean i also call my window manager layout master/stack and i don't see what's wrong with that.
Develop
Is use develop
anyways. because main
/ master
is for deployments only. When it comes to starting a new project, I don't give a flying horseshit of a fuck. I use whatever git sets me up with and due to terminal auto complete it's ma
TAB either way. The way I experienced it, everyone with a strong preference towards either is an annoying shithat of a person who will be booted from my team the moment they start this debate.
main-master, with all branches being non-main masters. No slaves in my neighborhood.
For all the sudden word scholars here: there is no second word "master" that's spelled, pronounced, and written exactly the same as the other one but is entirely unrelated to the concept of master\slave. All modern meanings of the word master derive from the same root: magister, meaning an authority or teacher.
A "master recording" is the authority, the base copy from which all others are duplicated. They aren't called "slave" copies, although the primary use of the terms in computing did originally use those 2 words. Also as someone else pointed out, you don't even really make copies of git branches in the same way as audio so the term is misapplied.
Main is also a bad name, unless you're working on a solo project with only 1 main branch and some features. As soon as you start collaborating with other people, you should really have individual dev branches or "forks" (be honest, 90% of you aren't rawdogging git straight from the CLI, there's a forge website involved as hub) to work on, with an integration\testing "fork"\branch to combine work and a release branch for final code, with each discrete release tagged.
No gods, no kings, no masters!