This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
- # announcements (5)
- # beginners (90)
- # cider (15)
- # clara (1)
- # clj-kondo (2)
- # cljs-dev (17)
- # clojars (8)
- # clojure (132)
- # clojure-europe (14)
- # clojure-nl (5)
- # clojure-uk (57)
- # clojurescript (39)
- # code-reviews (44)
- # conjure (6)
- # core-async (6)
- # crux (3)
- # cursive (20)
- # data-science (1)
- # datomic (13)
- # fulcro (11)
- # graalvm (6)
- # graphql (6)
- # helix (10)
- # joker (2)
- # kaocha (37)
- # leiningen (24)
- # malli (15)
- # off-topic (13)
- # pathom (18)
- # pedestal (14)
- # re-frame (67)
- # reitit (5)
- # ring (13)
- # ring-swagger (4)
- # sci (41)
- # shadow-cljs (33)
- # slack-help (5)
- # spacemacs (1)
- # sql (34)
- # tools-deps (64)
- # vim (171)
Just waiting for the wee one to stir - he's making movement noises in his bed atm, so won't be long.
Our current issue with it is how to properly initialise our database connection pools on startup - it doesn't seem to want to call any of our code to let us do that (it works fine when importing new realms, but not when we reload them from the keycloak database)
Our fault for trying to integrate Keycloak into an existing application, rather than doing something greenfield, I guess 😉
I am happy with the bad weather, leads to less people congregating in large crowds 😄
Best suggestion I've seen for what to rename master branches to: canon, so that we can ask if changes are canonical yet, or if they're non-canonical
Doesn’t canon have religious overtones, i.e., those who rule, which can I suppose be objectionable to some.
It's not a serious suggestion, but it's a term used in both religious and secular contexts :shrug:
true, just as other words have an etymology that prediates their current apparent usage.
I was thinking just the same thing - for some reason, subversion came to mind and it has a trunk and branch
I don't see master as being problematic in the Version Control context because it is not used in a context of oppression, i.e. we don't have slave branches. It has the same sense as a master tape in a recording context, it just means the most correct / canonical version, it does not describe a power dynamic. I can understand not wanting to use master / slave for relationships between machines in a cluster, because that context does connote a power relationship
As far as I know the terminology is mirrored after an older VCS and that one used master/slave. Someone on twitter found an old mailing list message that confirmed that. I couldn’t find the tweet right now.
having said that I am perfectly happy to use other words - how about omega branch instead of master branch?
It seems like git are designing a system where "master" becomes a personal choice, so your local "master" might be named "main", and when you push, it'll push to master.
This is all supported already of course, but it's about adding a default for master to be remapped to main automatically.
And, as master doesn't bother me as a term, I think this is a good solution. It means that we don't even need to bikeshed it! You use whatever you want, and I'll use whatever I want.
(I read the git-dev mailing list discussion & patch to see what was happening around this)
If memory serves, it's mostly being pioneered by GitHub, but the Git maintainer is supportive of it.
For many years, my primary branch was called
develop because that's where I did all my development. That was prior to doing Clojure stuff. But I switched my active Clojure projects to have
develop as the default branch a while ago and I've been deleting the old
master branch after they've diverged for a while.