It's a bit of an older argument now, but a lot of projects have changed their trunk branch to 'main' in an effort to remove loaded words from the toolchain. This is a discussion that seems to have never happened for node-config.

My own belief is that 'master/copy' is its own concept from the recording and publishing industry and does not possess historical baggage, whereas the same word from engine and hydraulics design has exactly the sort of connotations people are upset about. The complication however, is it came about in discussions that the git creators in fact intended the problematic meaning, not the publishing notion. Well, shit. But also, wat?

My opinion is that Subversion chose the correct name: Trunk, place where all branches eventually meet - or die trying, and that master was already an odd choice for git since it was built for project retaining release branches anyway. That said, most of the OSS I touch chose 'main', so there's a tension between the pedantic little demon sitting on one shoulder and the 'muscle memory is going to getcha if you do' demon sitting on the other.

So my vote would be trunk, main, or leave it. And since I'm busy procrastinating from other things I definitely should be working on, and this is definitely not a distraction from that work, I thought I'd mention it here since it's been banging around in my brain for a couple months and won't go away.

(confession: my git settings currently default to 'main' despite my protestations that 'trunk' is superior)