Hi all, I sent a message to the us...@clusterlabs.org list about releasing Pacemaker 2.1.0 next year.
Coincidentally, there is a plan in the git and Github communities to change the default git branch from "master" to "main": https://github.com/github/renaming The rationale for the change is not the specific meaning as used in branching, but rather to avoid any possibility of fostering an exclusionary environment, and to replace generic metaphors with something more obvious (especially to non-native English speakers). The change would not affect existing repositories/projects. However I am wondering if we should take the opportunity of the minor-version bump to do the same for Pacemaker. The impact on developers would be a one-time process for each checkout/fork: https://wiki.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Pacemaker_2.1_Changes#Development_changes In my opinion, this is a minor usage that many existing projects will not bother changing, but I do think that since all new projects will default to "main", sometime in the future any project still using "master" will appear outdated to young developers. We could use "main" or something else. Some projects are switching to names like "release", "stable", or "next" depending on how they're actually using the branch ("next" would be appropriate in Pacemaker's case). This will probably go on for years, so I am fine with either changing it with 2.1.0 (since it has bigger changes than usual, and we can get ahead of the curve) or waiting until the dust settles and future conventions are clearer. Opinions? -- Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/