> What a strange thing to claim, when both this thread and the original post talk about things that need to update based on the change, such as CI/CD scripts, git aliases, and so on.
I believe I've said something that's easy to understand, at least without bad faith.
Git end users create repos only rarely, but creating preconfigured Git repos is gitlab's business. This discussion is about gitlab's announcement. Do you have a hard time understanding any of this?
> Yes, I'm just saying it's strange that git added support to customize the name, but then didn't add a way to ask it what it's configured to, given that things will depend on knowing what that name is.
It's called software development best practices, particularly adding changes in a backward-compatible way so that not to change the expected behavior.
> I believe I've said something that's easy to understand, at least without bad faith.
I’m pretty sure I understand what you’re saying - "this change only affects creation of new repos”?
The responder isn’t missing your point, they’re disagreeing with it - they're pointing out that anybody who needs to work with a repo now needs to explicitly configure the name of the canonical branch, where previously they could safely assume the default was “master”; ergo it affects anybody who uses a repo for as long as it exists, not just the repo creator and not just at repo creation time.
> adding changes in a backward-compatible way so that not to change the expected behavior
The expected behaviour until recently was that “git checkout master” would take you to the canonical source branch - this behaviour has changed, in a backward-incompatible way (any code which worked in the past by using that command now needs to be changed)
I believe I've said something that's easy to understand, at least without bad faith.
Git end users create repos only rarely, but creating preconfigured Git repos is gitlab's business. This discussion is about gitlab's announcement. Do you have a hard time understanding any of this?
> Yes, I'm just saying it's strange that git added support to customize the name, but then didn't add a way to ask it what it's configured to, given that things will depend on knowing what that name is.
It's called software development best practices, particularly adding changes in a backward-compatible way so that not to change the expected behavior.