From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: language cleanups in code and docs
In-reply-to: <4601de0f-fc81-de87-7173-75fee5497f85@2ndQuadrant.com>
References: <20200615182235.x7lch5n6kcjq4aue@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <4601de0f-fc81-de87-7173-75fee5497f85@2ndQuadrant.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Tue, 16 Jun 2020 19:41:06 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1406830.1592351744.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 19:55:44 -0400
Message-ID: <1406831.1592351744@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 6/15/20 2:22 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> 2) 'master' as a reference to the branch. Personally I be in favor of
>> changing the branch name, but it seems like it'd be better done as a
>> somewhat separate discussion to me, as it affects development
>> practices to some degree.

> I'm OK with this, but I would need plenty of notice to get the buildfarm
> adjusted.

"master" is the default branch name established by git, is it not?  Not
something we picked.  I don't feel like we need to be out front of the
rest of the world in changing that.  It'd be a cheaper change than some of
the other proposals in this thread, no doubt, but it would still create
confusion for new hackers who are used to the standard git convention.

			regards, tom lane