In the wider context of computing and technology, “master” has historically often been paired with “slave” as well, such as old IDE hard drives that had to be switched from master to slave depending on which cable they were plugged into on which port of the motherboard. I realise that’s a bit of an odd example, but there are numerous ones.
Anyway, while I don’t think many people have ever used a branch name of slave, it’s entirely feasible to argue that any branch that isn’t master is in some way subservient to it as opposed to the master branch being the most experienced. The point isn’t to debate that the way you view it is incorrect, your view is entirely reasonable and rational but in order to be inclusive we should take all other views into account and in a very simple way, rather than debate the meaning of the word master in this specific context and telling people that they’re “wrong” for feeling a certain way about it, it’s easy to change the word and thanks to the excellent design of git, there isn’t really any downsides to it.
Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been device terminology for half a century, and has been phased out over the last decade. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.
I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.
I do think dropping master is absurd, since it in no way implies slavery or any such thing. mastermostly has uses that are entirely inoffensive, unless post-graduate degrees are racist, for example.
But I do think there is some merit in moving off the idea of white is good and black is bad. There are some good arguments that we shouldn’t bestow magic powers upon words, but there is also a lot of merit in the idea that these words affect our perception in negative ways and there is really nothing lost by shifting to equally good alternatives.
If the terms were reversed, you might think differently! We’re not always aware of our own bias, but we can strive to examine how we think about things instead of making snap judgements
Maybe it’s my culture. I think of master as the “master of kung-fu/art/sword/”. Something or someone that have earned respect and is at the core of it’s field.
Yes, I entirely agree. A masterpiece, or mastering an art, or more relevant to software branches: master tapes. None of these imply any sort of subjugation etc…
But… that’s just about the word “master”. I do think there are other terms that it’s a good idea to migrate away from.
Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been a device terminology for half a century. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.
I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.
Yeah it’s so funny to feel the need to have a “hot take” on branch naming. It’s like if Joe from my team asked me to file some papers under the green folder rather than the red. I’d be like say no more Joe, green folder it is. I don’t care but if somebody cares then they have their say. How do internet people even function in group with other people, with the constant contrarian attitude they carry around?
Just like “master” in git. WTH is wrong with it. I feed “master” as “the master of kung-fu” is much better then “main”.
In the wider context of computing and technology, “master” has historically often been paired with “slave” as well, such as old IDE hard drives that had to be switched from master to slave depending on which cable they were plugged into on which port of the motherboard. I realise that’s a bit of an odd example, but there are numerous ones.
Anyway, while I don’t think many people have ever used a branch name of
slave, it’s entirely feasible to argue that any branch that isn’tmasteris in some way subservient to it as opposed to themasterbranch being the most experienced. The point isn’t to debate that the way you view it is incorrect, your view is entirely reasonable and rational but in order to be inclusive we should take all other views into account and in a very simple way, rather than debate the meaning of the wordmasterin this specific context and telling people that they’re “wrong” for feeling a certain way about it, it’s easy to change the word and thanks to the excellent design of git, there isn’t really any downsides to it.The “slave” part was always weird to me, so I’m fine moving to “main” over “master.”
Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been device terminology for half a century, and has been phased out over the last decade. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.
I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.
I do think dropping
masteris absurd, since it in no way implies slavery or any such thing.mastermostly has uses that are entirely inoffensive, unless post-graduate degrees are racist, for example.But I do think there is some merit in moving off the idea of white is good and black is bad. There are some good arguments that we shouldn’t bestow magic powers upon words, but there is also a lot of merit in the idea that these words affect our perception in negative ways and there is really nothing lost by shifting to equally good alternatives.
The idea of “black list” has nothing to do with black people, to my understending
It does to people who are absolutely obsessed with race and see it everywhere they look.
If the terms were reversed, you might think differently! We’re not always aware of our own bias, but we can strive to examine how we think about things instead of making snap judgements
That’s not the issue. The issue is inherently seeing white as meaning good and black as meaning bad.
This has absolutely nothing to do with racial features.
I don’t think you understand the pervasiveness of racial animosity.
Maybe it’s my culture. I think of
masteras the “master of kung-fu/art/sword/”. Something or someone that have earned respect and is at the core of it’s field.Yes, I entirely agree. A masterpiece, or mastering an art, or more relevant to software branches: master tapes. None of these imply any sort of subjugation etc…
But… that’s just about the word “master”. I do think there are other terms that it’s a good idea to migrate away from.
this gave me a good laugh
Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been a device terminology for half a century. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.
I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.
If “master” unintentionally made some people uncomfortable then there’s no harm in changing the default, since you can modify it if you choose.
Yeah it’s so funny to feel the need to have a “hot take” on branch naming. It’s like if Joe from my team asked me to file some papers under the green folder rather than the red. I’d be like say no more Joe, green folder it is. I don’t care but if somebody cares then they have their say. How do internet people even function in group with other people, with the constant contrarian attitude they carry around?