Am Donnerstag, dem 13.02.2025 um 10:30 +0000 schrieb Attila Lendvai: > > Here's my perspective: it will cost us basically nothing to rename > > the master branch, > > i suspect you'd be surprised how many places will need to be touched > until the whole infra is back on track after such a rename... > > e.g. consider just the "bootstrapping" of this rename: > > if you simply rename the branch, then people won't be able to guix > pull after the rename. > > if you keep two branches, then for how long until no users are left > who will attempt to guix pull using an unprepared guix binary? > > or should we add code to guix preemptively that can deal with both > the pre and post rename environment? then have a grace period before > the rename? for how long? Consider these steps:
1. Create 'main', following 'master'. 2. Push a commit that makes 'main' the branch of %default-guix-channel. 3. Push that commit to both 'master' and 'main'. 4. Lock master on said commit. Note that these steps are really not that different from moving Guix to Codeberg (you have to update %default-channel-url). Since users have to update either way, it's better to do both at once than just one at a time. Cheers
