Empty default branch is not very useful #12

New issue

Closed

opened 2025-03-24 14:39:44 +00:00 by ferdnyc · 1 comment

ferdnyc commented

2025-03-24 14:39:44 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

If the team wants to use the stg and prod branches to hold the two versions of the configuration, that's fine, but why not configure stg as the repo default branch and delete main entirely? Presumably any MRs submitted should target stg, and anyone looking to make use of the repo for local building or etc. should also work off stg unless otherwise needed.

There's no reason there has to be a main branch, if the de facto default is stg. Just make it the literal default.

(Settings > Repository settings > Branch defaults to change the default branch, then you might need to adjust the Branch rules right below to remove the protection from main before it can be deleted.)

It's not particularly useful to (potential) contributors browsing or cloning the project, if the only thing they see is a basically-empty repo. It also won't help anyone looking to submit an MR, if they end up targeting the empty `main` branch by default. If the team wants to use the `stg` and `prod` branches to hold the two versions of the configuration, that's fine, but why not configure `stg` as the repo default branch and delete `main` entirely? Presumably any MRs submitted should target `stg`, and anyone looking to make use of the repo for local building or etc. should also work off `stg` unless otherwise needed. There's no reason there has to _be_ a `main` branch, if the de facto default is `stg`. Just make it the _literal_ default. (**Settings > Repository settings > Branch defaults** to change the default branch, then you might need to adjust the **Branch rules** right below to remove the protection from `main` before it can be deleted.)