# Community's take on changing \`master\` branch to \`main\` **URL:** \ **Category:** Python Help\ **Created:** [June 17, 2020, 2:38pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462 "2020-06-17T14:38:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![adrinjalali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/adrinjalali/32/15585_2.png) [@adrinjalali](https://discuss.python.org/u/adrinjalali)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2020, 2:38pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/1 "2020-06-17T14:38:46Z")
In the wake of recent events, a good part of the git-using community is converging to use `main` as the name for the _default_ branch instead of `master`. Some related discussion: > > > Tobie Langel @tobie [https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html](https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html) And github seems to be changing the default branch to `main`: [https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1271253144442253312](https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1271253144442253312) We started talking about it in `scikit-learn` [here](https://github.com/scikit-learn/scikit-learn/issues/17595), but @rth rightfully raised that this is a topic probably better raised at the Python community level. It would be nice to see if there’s some sort of a consensus in the community and somewhat coordinate the change (if we decide to do so) with possibly a coordinated deprecation period, i.e. not deleting the `master` but have it as a mirror to the new branch (e.g. `main`) for a while. ---
**Author:** ![gpshead](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/gpshead/32/54_2.png) [@gpshead](https://discuss.python.org/u/gpshead)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 3:30pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/2 "2020-06-18T15:30:51Z")
We _should_ do it. But as we’re a large project you are right, we need to work out how to do it without breaking forks, pending PRs, CI & bot automation, and such. It seems like there will be a lot of projects in the world doing the same which should result in some best practices. I’d love it if Github could make it transparent such that the names master and main were synonymous and just exposed main instead of master as the only/default in new clones and forks as a way to make the transition less disruptive. Given how git works, I don’t know if that is feasible. I consider this “desired”, but not something we should rush. ---
**Author:** ![zware](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/zware/32/58_2.png) [@zware](https://discuss.python.org/u/zware)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 7:19pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/3 "2020-06-18T19:19:35Z")
I wonder about, instead of switching from one symbolic name to another, going ahead and forking the `3.10` branch, marking it as the default, and phasing out `master` that way. When 3.11 time comes around, we fork that branch from `3.10` and mark it as default when ready. I’m not sure that won’t cause havoc with some automated processes, though 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![gpshead](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/gpshead/32/54_2.png) [@gpshead](https://discuss.python.org/u/gpshead)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 7:46pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/4 "2020-06-18T19:46:53Z")
> [@zware](#): > > I wonder about, instead of switching from one symbolic name to another, going ahead and forking the `3.10` branch, marking it as the default, and phasing out `master` that way. When 3.11 time comes around, we fork that branch from `3.10` and mark it as default when ready. I suspect that might get weird after every branch cut just due to how Github works. We want PRs to be made against the main branch as they can stay around for a while before they land and our workflow is to always land in main (master today) and backport to releases. If the main branch changes in the interim, can that PR be automatically retargeted to a new branch? _(this is the same issue with open PRs today against master if a main branch rename lands)_ ---
**Author:** ![zware](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/zware/32/58_2.png) [@zware](https://discuss.python.org/u/zware)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 9:32pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/5 "2020-06-18T21:32:16Z")
> [@gpshead](#): > > We want PRs to be made against the main branch as they can stay around for a while before they land and our workflow is to always land in main (master today) and backport to releases. I don’t think there’s any particular reason that we must keep that bit of the workflow; we could allow miss-islington to do forward-ports as well as backports and allow contributors to open their PR against whichever branch they want. There’s a slim chance this would also help with the annoyance where _everybody_ gets pinged for review when someone opens a PR against a different branch than the change was developed from 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![EpicWink](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/epicwink/32/17968_2.png) [@EpicWink](https://discuss.python.org/u/EpicWink)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 11:04pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/6 "2020-06-18T23:04:19Z")
Why not “[trunk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trunk_%28software%29?wprov=sfla1)” instead of “main”. Doesn’t everyone still have love for the good old days of SVN 😈 ---
**Author:** ![methane](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/methane/32/43_2.png) [@methane](https://discuss.python.org/u/methane)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 11:21pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/7 "2020-06-18T23:21:52Z")
I’m not sure the word “master” really hurt people and this word policing really help people. But since I believe people living in US and English speaking world should decide what word should be banned, I abstein from voting. My alternative ideas for new default branch name are: - “dev” – Since we use the default branch only in early stage. - “next” – Since we use the “next” term in `Misc/NEWS.d/next". I think the “main” and “trunk” branch is good too. As one of Japanese, I familiar to “main” than “trunk”. I used subversion so I know “trunk”. But many young people don’t know VCS other than git. Anyway, I heard Github is developing tool for this change. Let’s wait it. ---
**Author:** ![miker256](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/miker256/32/2330_2.png) [@miker256](https://discuss.python.org/u/miker256)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2020, 11:53pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/8 "2020-06-18T23:53:02Z")
I don’t mind the name change from master to main. Though, I agree with @methane on waiting to see how GitHub implements this change. ---
**Author:** ![smontanaro](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/smontanaro/32/1389_2.png) [@smontanaro](https://discuss.python.org/u/smontanaro)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2020, 10:25am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/9 "2020-06-19T10:25:31Z")
Has GitHub said anything about how they might make this transparent (or at least easier) for their users? I’m supportive of the change, but if GitHub can work most of the magic at their end, then I think it pays to see what (if any) magic they announce. ---
**Author:** ![Rhodri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/13edae/32.png) [@Rhodri](https://discuss.python.org/u/Rhodri)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2020, 1:08pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/10 "2020-06-19T13:08:49Z")
I would prefer not to change the primary branch name away from ‘master’. Creating taboos never helps. ---
**Author:** ![methane](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/methane/32/43_2.png) [@methane](https://discuss.python.org/u/methane)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2020, 1:19pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/11 "2020-06-19T13:19:25Z")
There is no official announcement yet. I saw this article. > **[Microsoft's GitHub is removing coding terms like 'master' and 'slave'](https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/microsofts-github-is-removing-coding-terms-like-master-and-slave/)** > > "It's a great idea and we are already working on this," said GitHub's CEO. > They also said they are releasing guidance and tools for users who may choose to rename their default branch in existing repositories. ---
**Author:** ![adrinjalali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/adrinjalali/32/15585_2.png) [@adrinjalali](https://discuss.python.org/u/adrinjalali)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2020, 3:08pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/12 "2020-06-19T15:08:00Z")
If I’m not mistaken, there’s an API end point where you can update the base branch as well, and I’m sure even if this doesn’t work, the new “tools” github’s going to publish will support that. ![Screenshot from 2020-06-19 16-38-02](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/uploads/python1/original/2X/4/4211f2eba79714e1489c98f386db0b451fd3adab.png) Now assuming we have the tools needed for the switch to happen, I think there are still things which need to be talked about and decided. I’m hoping to come up with a workflow which can also be used by the rest of the community, i.e. projects other than cpython. Setting up the hypothetical pipeline, would also give us a better idea of what tools we need. So as a starting point, maybe we could have: - create the new branch from the current master (for the sake of it let’s call it `main` for now) - make it the _default_ branch on github - change the documentation and CI to reflect the change - make sure it’s documented wherever required that the `master` branch will be removed on a specified date - if build/release scripts are on different repos, the release manager(s) should make sure the change is reflected there - request all new PRs be made against the new branch - change existing PRs - ask maintainers to make sure they change the target branch of PRs they work on, to the `main` branch ([link](https://help.github.com/en/github/collaborating-with-issues-and-pull-requests/changing-the-base-branch-of-a-pull-request)) OR - change the base branch of all PRs from `master` to `main` in bulk if possible - double check in CI or with a bot - have a CI step which fails if the PR targets `master` - this would only show up on PRs once they rebase or merge the latest `master`/`main`, so it’s not reliable for old PRs AND/OR - have a bot which comments on all PRs which target `master` - have a CI step on `main` which adds the newly merged PRs to `master` to keep backward compatibility as long as `master` stays there - it may be useful to make sure `master` stays a copy of `main` to prevent accidental changes directly to `master` by people who have write access to it The list may seem trivial to many of you, but it isn’t to many others. It would be nice to put our efforts together and avoid reinventing the wheel(s) in each of our projects. There are a few questions which we need to think about: - would we go with whatever github chooses as the new name for the default branch? Or do we like any specific name. This may be better discussed once we know what the new name is gonna be - what’s the deprecation period for `master`? It’s probably worth keeping for a while to avoid breaking all the CI scripts which depend on our default branches. If we do this, then for how long? - Does this need a PEP? WDYT? ---
**Author:** ![dimaqq](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/dimaqq/32/372_2.png) [@dimaqq](https://discuss.python.org/u/dimaqq)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2020, 2:49am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/13 "2020-06-23T02:49:37Z")
Based on the discussion in our company, I went a bit further in **my project** and adopted a convention where branch name signifies it’s **purpose**. Thus, I now have `prd`, `stg` and `dev`. ---
**Author:** ![GammaGames](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/gammagames/32/1844_2.png) [@GammaGames](https://discuss.python.org/u/GammaGames)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2020, 3:14pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/14 "2020-06-23T15:14:56Z")
This approach makes the most sense to me. I’ve always had a `develop` branch for in progress work, but we plan on renaming the base branch to `stable`/`production` for our projects. ---
**Author:** ![gpshead](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/gpshead/32/54_2.png) [@gpshead](https://discuss.python.org/u/gpshead)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2020, 2:11am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/communitys-take-on-changing-master-branch-to-main/4462/15 "2020-07-22T02:11:08Z")
Official GitHub guidance has appeared! [https://github.com/github/renaming](https://github.com/github/renaming)