[llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `master` branch?

[David Blaikie via llvm-dev]

(generally in favor, don't much care what the new name is -
consistency with git and github seems valuable - don't think I
personally care if it's one rename or two, but I agree with others
that we should discuss/have a plan & know the costs of that plan
before we make the change (whether we do it once or twice))

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:43 PM Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 19, 2020, at 15:38, Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> I'm interested to hear more about the actual problem Matt perceives with respect to the release actually: why should the release have any impact with the development branch?
>>
>>
>> That was just an example of a concrete time. Other transitions requiring wide coordination have had some release-associated timeframe (like minimum toolchain/cmake upgrades), so I thought it would just be a logical semi-arbitrary point in time.
>
>
> I saw using release in the past as a good sync point for toolchain/cmake upgrade before it as very practical effects: as such changes are very visible to folks consuming the release and we can include a heads up in the release notes or a warning when they execute CMake.
> Hopefully we have more freedom with the development branch: a few weeks head up for the bot infrastructure and the folks downstream having automation pulling from upstream continuously.
> Ultimately this is just a "simple" renaming: there shouldn't be deep configuration changes or infrastructure to rewire.
>
> Note that even for a casual user it would go unnoticed: cloning the repo from GitHub automatically pull the default branch which is a configurable name.

Speaking of which - how many things do actually need to know the
branch name - if the casual user can pull/checkout the code without
specifying a branch name, do the buildbots need to do anything
different? If they do specify the branch name today, perhaps we could
change their configurations so the don't need to do that & can rely on
the default.

When the change is made, will existing git checkouts (& possibly
buildbots) just keep working? (will all my local branches now be
branches on main instead of master?) Or will all developers have to do
some manual step(s) to update?

>
> (Note: We also need to reconfigure Phabricator at the same time).
>
> --
> Mehdi
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev