4 ms·

While there was almost certainly no original malintent with the phrase 'master' in this context, it's a very small and relatively easy change to make to avoid h

While there was almost certainly no original malintent with the phrase 'master' in this context, it's a very small and relatively easy change to make to avoid hiccups down the road. Even if you don't agree that this is needed, I think it's clear that it's easier to just rename it now than it would be to explain to someone a few months down the road the deep historical context for why this should not offend them.

dbsmith83 6y ago
I don't think that's true. Then you would just be explaining to new team members why you are not using master. You can explain to someone who doesn't know in one sentence where the term comes from.
triyambakam 6y ago
This kind of thinking though leads inadvertently to doublespeak. You end up avoiding saying so much you can't say anything.
1123581321 6y ago
It’s not deep historical context. It’s a contemporary, widespread usage of master to refer to an original or an exemplar. In the rare case an adult doesn’t know this, they can catch up in seconds.
arp242 6y ago
> easier to just rename it now than it would be to explain to someone a few months down the road the deep historical context for why this should not offend them Do you have any examples of such conversations, specifically regarding to the naming of the "master" branch?
loco5niner 6y ago
> it's a very small and relatively easy change to make to CREATE hiccups down the road. Fixed that for you.
Delk 6y ago
If people could just remember that there are in fact several meanings for words, having to engage in that conversation down the road would not even happen. Or perhaps it would, but assuming reasonable people, it might amount to clarifying what the word (such as "master") means in a particular case or where it came from. As long as the usage of the word isn't particularly strongly associated with what is offensive, that conversation shouldn't be a huge problem. If people start jumping on the bandwagon of renaming "master" (or any such term) en masse because of it being "potentially offensive", that makes people think the usage of the word is offensive, and the potential offensiveness and having to explain that it's not becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. And then we'll all need to change what we call this or that, just because people can't remember that words have multiple meanings. Let's not turn meanings that are not problems into ones that are.

dbsmith83 6y ago

I don't think that's true. Then you would just be explaining to new team members why you are not using master. You can explain to someone who doesn't know in one sentence where the term comes from.

triyambakam 6y ago

This kind of thinking though leads inadvertently to doublespeak. You end up avoiding saying so much you can't say anything.

1123581321 6y ago

It’s not deep historical context. It’s a contemporary, widespread usage of master to refer to an original or an exemplar. In the rare case an adult doesn’t know this, they can catch up in seconds.

arp242 6y ago

> easier to just rename it now than it would be to explain to someone a few months down the road the deep historical context for why this should not offend them Do you have any examples of such conversations, specifically regarding to the naming of the "master" branch?

loco5niner 6y ago

> it's a very small and relatively easy change to make to CREATE hiccups down the road. Fixed that for you.

Delk 6y ago

If people could just remember that there are in fact several meanings for words, having to engage in that conversation down the road would not even happen. Or perhaps it would, but assuming reasonable people, it might amount to clarifying what the word (such as "master") means in a particular case or where it came from. As long as the usage of the word isn't particularly strongly associated with what is offensive, that conversation shouldn't be a huge problem. If people start jumping on the bandwagon of renaming "master" (or any such term) en masse because of it being "potentially offensive", that makes people think the usage of the word is offensive, and the potential offensiveness and having to explain that it's not becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. And then we'll all need to change what we call this or that, just because people can't remember that words have multiple meanings. Let's not turn meanings that are not problems into ones that are.