On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 04:31:57PM -0800, Xiyue Deng wrote: > tho...@goirand.fr writes: > > What you experience shows one thing: having the default branch being > > set correctly should be what we mandate. > > Indeed. Though IIRC the default branch was not a native git concept > until 2.28, so user of older git may still get confused.
Firstly, 2.28 predates buster, so we're unlikely to have to worry about it very much. Secondly, while 2.28 fixed a number of problems that people ran into when trying to change the default branch name for new repositories and various other related corner cases, I don't think any of them applied to the simple case of just cloning a repository where the remote HEAD points to something other than "master". I'm not sure exactly how long that's worked for, but poking through "tig blame builtin/clone.c", I think it's probably been supported to some extent at least as far back as git 1.5.6. -- Colin Watson (he/him) [cjwat...@debian.org]
