Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
44 lines (33 loc) · 1.88 KB

rfc-036-dont-use-master-as-a-branch-name.md

File metadata and controls

44 lines (33 loc) · 1.88 KB
Raw

Don't use master as a branch name

Summary

Git's master branch name has its origin in a master-slave metaphor. This is insensitive to those whose ancestors were once enslaved. Instead, we MUST use main as the equivalent branch name for our internal repositories unless there's a more descriptive name to use and we SHOULD push our clients to allow us to do the same for their code.

Problem

The master branch name (along with most other technological uses of that word) has its origin in a master-slave metaphor. It doesn't fit our ethics to perpetuate that language. It's a relatively small step, but by changing it we can take one of many steps needed to try to break the cycle of institutional racism.

Proposal

Instead of calling a branch of a Git repository master we SHOULD name it main. We MUST do this for all internal repositories, unless there's a more appropriate name for that branch (such as release). We SHOULD push our clients to allow us to do the same in any repositories that we work in for them.

Developers MAY set their local development environments up to create Git repositories with main as the default branch using the steps described by Leigh Brenecki.

Alternatively, when the feature lands in Git, developers MAY instead set their default branch using the new init.defaultBranch option:

git config --global init.defaultBranch main

Next steps

  • Change all existing internal repositories with single "main" branches to rename master to main; see #149
  • Change all template repositories to rename master to main
  • Open another RFC to settle on naming conventions for repositories with multiple "main" branches (such as master and develop)