3 ms·

>And my impression was that the usage was more similar to "master copy" than "master of the plantation". Evidently, this is a relic from bitkeeper which uses t

>And my impression was that the usage was more similar to "master copy" than "master of the plantation". Evidently, this is a relic from bitkeeper which uses the "master/slave" terminology. https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask#L223 https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/H... https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/...

zucker42 6y ago
I was somewhat aware of Bitkeeper, but crucially, 1. There are no slave branches. 2. "My impression" was my impression as someone new to git. I'm extrapolating other people, but I think it's fair to say that many (most?) people won't make the connection to chattel slavery. 3. Git is not directly modelled off Bitkeeper. But like I said, I don't object to people changing the name, but more to people thinking changing the name is important.
waheoo 6y ago
No this is not a relic from bitkeeper. Why dont you ask the dev responsible instead of some random on a mailing list stringing assumptions to fit a narrative. https://mobile.twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441 https://mobile.twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441