this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
1032 points (98.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

19813 readers
314 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Anticorp 29 points 9 months ago (4 children)

If you're pushing to master, then you're doing it wrong.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Yeah main has been the defacto default branch name for like half a decade now

[–] TunaCowboy 11 points 9 months ago

git whoosh --hard

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Wait. It's that long?

Felt like we joke about the announcement 2 years ago. Time fly lol

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Imma be honest I pulled that estimate out of my ass lol, but I feel like it was pre-pandemic? which would put it at at least 4 years ago and so holy shit I'm gonna go cry in a corner because it's been 4 years since the start of the pandemic

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Isn't this only the case in github? All my repos are based from master, and I would assume that's because I init on the command line and push up to the remote?

[–] AA5B 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

GitLab also changed a few years back. We host our own, so got the update later than people using the service … it was a bit of an argument at first since everyone wanted to stick with the familiar, but laziness won out. Unfortunately, it’s not really justifiable to go back and change legacy projects, so now it’s inconsistent

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you don't have any scripts that rely on branch name it should be pretty trivial actually. But I wouldn't be shocked if you had a few dozen scripts that nobody has looked at in the last century lol

[–] AA5B 1 points 9 months ago

The question actually came up for a new tool to help automate dependency updates. Do we need to change the config to account for the inconsistency?

It turns out we don’t: it correctly uses the default branch, no matter what it’s called. However we had to consider the question. and investigate. It spent someone’s time

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why? I almost always have master/dev/stable.

[–] TunaCowboy 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You should not be pushing into your main/master/whatever branch.

All the main/master replies completely miss the point, further emphasizing sirsirsalot's statement.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think I’ll keep doing it. It’s worked fine for the past decade 🤷

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

It works fine for small projects. I think that with more than 2-3 devs a PR based strategy works better for enforcing review and just makes life easier in general, since you end up with less stuff like force pushes to fix minor things like whitespace errors that break everyone's local.

[–] Tanoh 3 points 9 months ago

Different workflows.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

git send-email