• kaida@feddit.de
      58·
      10 months ago

      I‘m anti-slavery but that’s just not the reason I use main as default branch

      • TxzK@lemmy.zipOP
        91·
        10 months ago

        yup same. I hate slavery just like anyone else but fail to see how naming a branch master has to do anything with it. Next are they gonna claim that master’s degree is pro slavery or something

        • Deebster@programming.dev
          13·
          10 months ago

          I put this one in the same camp as whichever well-meaning person came up with “happy holidays”. Other religions and cultures don’t mind Westerners celebrating Christmas, and over-corrections like this just give fuel to the “political correctness gone mad” (now re-branded as anti-woke) crowd.

          • hperrin@lemmy.world
            13·
            10 months ago

            Happy Holidays makes perfect sense. You can start saying it in early December, whereas if you say Merry Christmas in early December, you seem like you’re not very good with dates. Or maybe you’re one of those people who’s really obsessed with Christmas. I’ll say Happy Holidays until around the 23rd, when I’ll say Merry Christmas until the 26th, back to Happy Holidays until the 31st, when I say Happy New Year.

          • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
            15·
            10 months ago

            although in the context of version control, the term master simply refers to the gold master, a term borrowed from the recording industry which refers to the final mixed version of a recording, and does not have a corresponding slave.

            Either way, I think “main branch” is easier to say, so it’s a win.

  • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
    65·
    10 months ago

    Instead of either, it’s good to have a more descriptive primary branch:

    git checkout -b dontwritetothisbranchdirectlyyougottaopenaprfirstandhaveitreviewedandapprovedandthenpasstheautomatictests

  • Empathy [he/him]@beehaw.org
    50·
    10 months ago

    I use main because, although I never heard of anybody actually getting offended by master, it costs me nothing to use main instead. Also it looks prettier and seems to be the new convention ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • Ohi@lemmy.world
    49·
    10 months ago

    No disrespect, but asking everyone to remove words from the English language because they may offend a small group of oversensitive people is one of the most frustrating social initiatives of our time. “Master” makes sense for the job and unless we’re also putting “Slave” and “Cotton” on the dictionary chopping block, the arguement will always seem arbitrary to me.

    • Jorgelino@lemmy.ml
      14·
      10 months ago

      unless we’re also putting “Slave” and “Cotton” on the dictionary chopping block

      Aren’t we though? At least when it comes to tech, Master-Slave terminology has been largely deprecated in favor of other terms.

    • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.socialEnglish
      13·
      10 months ago

      The only reason you think “master” makes sense is because you’re used to it. It’s actually quite a weird connection to make, if you aren’t used to it. “Main” is much more straight forward. And nobody is really demanding people stop using “master”, so far as I am aware, it’s just that people are making that choice themselves.

      • corship@feddit.de
        8·
        10 months ago

        I vote for naming this branch “mommy”, since all other branches are it’s offspring, and related to it.

        • katy ✨
          4·
          10 months ago

          name it daddy so i can open an issue and say i have daddy issues

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        3·
        10 months ago

        And nobody is really demanding people stop using “master”, so far as I am aware

        GitHub, GitLab, and git itself, are all using main as the default name of the default branch, by default.

        • lurker2718@lemmings.world
          3·
          10 months ago

          Yes that is the point. They made the choice to change their default. You can still make the choice to name your branches, especially the main one, as you like. Setting it for a project is less work than complaining about it.

      • Urist@lemmy.mlEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        It is much easier for lots of western progressives (i.e. moderates if that label was used properly) to fix a naming scheme than reevaluate the exploitative structures on which their lives are based.

  • vojel@discuss.tchncs.de
    38·
    10 months ago

    Oh I don’t give a single fuck about the discussion, it’s technology, not politics. I am more upset that my company has some legacy repositories with master and the newer ones with a main branch. So everytime I want to create a MR with push options via command line I need to change main to master or visa versa.

  • Hellfire103@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    37·
    10 months ago

    I use master because I’m nostalgic. If it matters that much, though, I’ll start using trunk (like we used to back in the days of SVN).

  • alefunguju@lemmy.one
    37·
    10 months ago

    I use main as my default branch because it’s what Git has been defaulting to for some time now

  • mlg@lemmy.worldEnglish
    32·
    10 months ago

    Master sounded so much cooler man

    Like yeah I’m a master of linux

    Literally no connotation to slavery when the word slave isn’t even used in the git terminology

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.mlEnglish
    24·
    10 months ago

    It speaks to the deep rooted whiteness of the industry that such a common-sense change is treated as completely bullshit even to this day.

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      9·
      10 months ago

      It speaks to deep rooted butthurtness of USA boomers and constant need to enforce their stupid ass rules to others. It’s not racist, neither are blacklist or whitelist.

      • lurker2718@lemmings.world
        8·
        10 months ago

        Even ignoring the question of racism, they are still stupid names.

        Imagine teaching a child about this and it asks: Why is white allowed and black not? The only answer is, because it is like this for a long time. If we name them allowlist and denylist, it is obvious to all English speaking people. Shouldn’t we strive for descriptive names in programming?

        However, if you use names whitelist an blacklist, you need to make the implicit connection white-positive black-negative. Yes obviously this does not make you racist if you do this in programming. But is it good?

        • derpgon@programming.dev
          5·
          10 months ago

          White - light. Black - no light. White knight - good. Black knight - bad.

          These two colors have a meaning. It has fuck all to do with skin color. And if you do, then you are helping to enable “useless racism” in the form of “this offends the black community”, while literally nobody gives a fuck.

          Its a useless change in the sake of changing things. Everyone is tech eants the superstar and wants to say “Hey, you are using X (not Twitter in this case)! I made that, noice.”.

          If someone decided to change it next week to primary, would you be for or against it?

          • bane_killgrind@lemmy.mlEnglish
            4·
            10 months ago

            Why is a filled checkbox positive and an empty checkbox negative

            Sounds like white true black false is not universal

          • lurker2718@lemmings.world
            1·
            10 months ago

            Yes colors have a meaning. However, they change ober time and culture. So why not use the word which describes exactly what we mean?

            I agree, nowadays blacklist/whitelist has practically nothing to do with skin color. However i do think it is weird to use the same words for describing the appearance of people and good/bad.

            Well i would be indifferent to the renaming to primary, because it doesn’t really matter to me what they call their branches, as long as it is descriptive. primary also conveys the meaning. I would probably continue using main/dev because i see no reason to change.
            I am not someone who says “You should change this!”. I just say, think of it, there are some reasons to change and the only reason to keep it, os that we did it always like this. I think there are reasons for selecting better words. And I am only annoyed by people who are outraged by things others do, which does not really affects them negatively. I get it that someone wants to continue using blacklist, master, etc. and I am ok with that.

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.mlEnglish
          3·
          10 months ago

          AL/BL. See, not stupid at all. You just don’t want to admit you’re deeply racist and that’s your motivation for caring a non-zero shit about this.

          Programmers will literally uproot their entire language of choice if it’s required it but can’t replace one definition? Give me a fucking break.

          • bane_killgrind@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2·
            10 months ago

            Taking this stuff personally is just intellectual laziness. The phrase “Allowlist” isn’t about that guy, and if he can’t grok that it isn’t he needs to work on himself.

      • Auzy@beehaw.org
        2·
        10 months ago

        I really don’t see the problem with switching the names.

        You seem to be the only one in this entire discussion getting triggered about being more inclusive honestly. Nobody else cares…

        But yeah, as others have said, the changes make sense regardless, and if it’s more inclusive, I have no problem with that. It’s not a big deal for me, but it might be for other people.

        If you’re offended by the change, you can still use master as your main repo.

  • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
    22·
    10 months ago

    I find it funny how many ppl complained about it when it came up. Now it is the default on github and other code forges. And now one cares anymore if it is master or main.

        • fl42v@lemmy.ml
          6·
          10 months ago

          Do you really have to, tho? One can keep using masters, move them to mains, or even symlink one to another so that everyone is comfortable with whatever they’re used to. Seems like a non-issue to me 🤷

          • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
            3·
            10 months ago

            We’ve ended up with a 50:50 chance of what any repo is doing. All depends on when the repo was created (old ones are all master) and if the creator tried to preserve consistency or not (yes: master, no: took the default of main).

            It’s annoying and pointless.

            • fl42v@lemmy.ml
              3·
              10 months ago

              I mean smth like git symbolic-ref refs/heads/master refs/heads/main. Not sure if it’s a bad practice or smth, tho

          • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
            1·
            10 months ago

            It’s an issue, because many tools default to a certain branch, and people do too. So each build pipeline has to be changed, each dev has to check for each repo he’s working on, whether it’s using main or master, etc, etc.

            Just think about what hell would break loose, if Microsoft would be forced to rename C: to something else because someone was reminded of the "C word ".

      • Deebster@programming.dev
        12·
        10 months ago

        On the plus side, forcing people to support alternative branch names surely has led to better software support for a core Git feature.

      • lugal@lemmy.ml
        11·
        10 months ago

        You sound like a slave owner, ngl

        I am not pro slavery but I will not free my chattel slaves. People just break with this tradition for extremely dubious reasons.

        Listen to yourself!

        Edit: I was thinking about putting “/s” at the end but thought it was obvious enough. I was wrong

          • lugal@lemmy.ml
            3·
            10 months ago

            Why do I keep getting this comment? Maybe I should call myself Poe in the future

            • Deebster@programming.dev
              6·
              10 months ago

              I think on the Fediverse (or just Lemmy?) I’ve seen more people who’d post your comment non-ironically. Or maybe they’re not serious either (but they’d have to be really committed to the bit).

              • lugal@lemmy.ml
                2·
                10 months ago

                I had a conversation recently where someone said they weren’t serious after several levels of comments that were downvoted into oblivion. I try to make myself understood in the second (or third) level of comments or, as in this case, in an edit

              • lugal@lemmy.ml
                1·
                10 months ago

                I guess I once again forgot the “/s”. I’m not going to call me “Poe” at any point of time /s

      • fl42v@lemmy.ml
        3·
        10 months ago

        Sb got offended for no reason, then companies decided to get public approval points out of it; nothing new or notable. Seriously, tf is the point of overanalyzing it like there’s nothing better to do?

  • IsoSpandy@lemm.ee
    10·
    10 months ago

    I use master because when I do ‘git init .’ I get a master branch and I am lazy enough to not rename it. As for typing it later on… . Well zsh does that for me