search

kitware-resonant / cookiecutter-resonant

Apache License 2.0
11 stars 6 forks source link

Add `default_branch` option to handle GitHub's default `main` branch #172

Closed banesullivan closed 2 years ago

banesullivan commented 2 years ago

The default base branch for GitHub is now main and the cookiecutter's workflow should reflect that.

brianhelba commented 2 years ago

Git's default branch is still master, so any repo created with git init will still use that. Since we can't assume that a repo has a particular default branch name, I don't think this is going to help.

However, I found this suggestion: https://stackoverflow.com/a/68414395 . I think that might solve things generally.

@banesullivan If that sounds like it'll work, could you update this PR with that change? We can actually dogfood it by changing https://github.com/girder/cookiecutter-girder-4/blob/master/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L6 too.

banesullivan commented 2 years ago

That doesn't seem to work: https://github.com/girder/cookiecutter-girder-4/actions/runs/1742947993

I'll change this to let the user specify the default branch in the cookie-cutter options

edit: it would work by putting an if: on the job itself but that would be really messy and prevent triggers from pull_request, workflow_dispatch, etc. without a verbose logical expression

banesullivan commented 2 years ago

Updated to have a new default_branch option, which IMO should default to main

brianhelba commented 2 years ago

It seems that GitHub Actions currently lacks technical support for dynamic matching of the default branch. It must be named.

This cookiecutter (like any) requires the bootstrapping developer to run git init as a separate step, and they can easily select any default branch name. Deciding which specific name is best is beyond what this cookiecutter can address. Downstream projects can make their own choices, and it's easy to alter the default branch at project bootstrap.

I'll file a bug to revisit this if GitHub adds support for dynamic branch names

brianhelba commented 2 years ago

See https://github.com/girder/cookiecutter-girder-4/issues/188

To be clear, I'm sympathetic to projects that want to use a different Git repo structure. However, I don't want to add even more complexity to this repo by having a new cookiecutter option, unless it adds greater utility.