• Eager Eagle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    39·
    3 months ago

    it has always bothered me that checkout is overloaded: it can switch branches or discard pending changes in an unrecoverable way.

    so, PSA, you can replicate the safe part of checkout with git switch and the unsafe with git restore.

  • rhabarba@feddit.org
    4219·
    3 months ago

    I renamed my master branch slaveowner. To make it more clear.

    It is software, my friends. It’s not a tribe of people.

    • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
      79·
      3 months ago

      Not gonna lie, the master branch thing has been perceived as problematic but I don’t typically see an issue with it. It’s similar to master bedroom or bath. Kind of fucked up name origin, but I don’t think anyone’s really making a fuss about it.

      Whatever the fuck you’re doing though feels like some gross, racist fantasy. It’s really weird, dude. If you think that’s funny you might need to go talk to some real people or touch grass.

  • majster@lemmy.zipEnglish
    13·
    3 months ago

    I still see master branches everywhere, even my new personal repos. This git renaming story is one of the most stupid OSS pushes I remember. That and Gimp fork, that then died out I think.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      127·
      3 months ago

      It wasn’t even tech bros. Some people started using opensource software, discovered the master branch and lost their shit. Nobody meaningful had ever connected the name to anything malevolent, but those people made themselves be offended in the name of people who weren’t even offended by it.

      Microsoft bought github and didn’t want the bad press so they renamed it after the twitter shitstorm. The professional victims then moved on to whatever else made noise on twitter and that was that.

      I force all new projects to use master as all my old scripts and repos use master. Twitter shitstorms scan stay where they should be: in the toilet bowl of the internet aka twitter.