Rename "master" branch to "main" for glibc 2.35 release.

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 1/31/22 07:46, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Carlos O'Donell:
> 
>> My proposal is to rename the development and release branches at the point
>> that glibc 2.35 branches:
>>
>> * master -> main
>>
>> * release/2.35/master -> release/2.35/main
>>
>> No alias would be provided for the master branch; we would immediately
>> start using 'main' as the development branch.
> 
> What is the reason for using ”main” for release branches?

There is no strong justification for using 'main' for release branches.

It is a continuation of the existing format of branch names, and so would
require only a search and replace in your script.
 
> If we don't add a symbolic ref, we could use release/2.35.

Andreas points out that release/2.35 and release/2.35/main cannot coexist
so that would mean we would need to make a choice about which to use and
stick with that choice:

* master -> main
* release/2.35/master -> release/2.35

We could not then go back and have:

* release/2.35/main
* release/2.35/foo
* release/2.35/bar

If we ever wanted alternative non-main branches for glibc 2.35?

This consideration means I'm in favor of keeping the existing structure
of release/2.35/main.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.