Subject: Re: [PATCH] "master" should be treated no differently from any other branch

From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 16:59:05 +0100

Han-Wen Nienhuys escreveu:
> Johannes Schindelin escreveu:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Andy Parkins wrote:
>>
>>> "master" shouldn't get special treatment; making different log messages 
>>> based on the name of the branch is bad form.  What if a user likes 
>>> "my/master" or "my/head" as their master branch?
>> I do not agree. There is usually a principal branch, where you collect the 
>> topics, and you do want to treat that special. As for the name: better 
>> have a convention here than configurability. You would not want "git" to 
>> be called "guitar" for some users, just because they happen to like that 
>> name more, either, right?
> 
> Disagree: I have two principal branches, master and stable/2.10.  I don't see
> why the latter should get different commit messages.

Note that this also confused my codeveloper (who is rather enamoured bzr), who
was wondering what the other branch was in case of 

  Merge branch 'master' of ssh+git://git.sv.gnu.org/srv/git/lilypond

Wouldn't it be better to mention the id of the local repository too? 

  Merge branch 'master' of ssh+git://git.sv.gnu.org/srv/git/lilypond into 
  'master' of [email-masked]'

this would give more information when these commit messages get pushed to 
someone else.

--