> Git's terminology descends from BitKeeper, which was explicitly using master/slave That GNOME mailing list post was retracted the next year[0]. I wrote a su

> Git's terminology descends from BitKeeper, which was explicitly using master/slave That GNOME mailing list post was retracted the next year[0]. I wrote a summary of the history[1] for Git Rev News, the git developers newsletter. In short, the usage didn't come from BitKeeper, and was intended to mean 'master copy'. After the article was published, Aaron Kushner from BitKeeper reached out and gave me some more history on the usage of 'slave repository' in that one particular spot in BitKeeper[2]: it was a presentation for a client that was already using master/slave terminology and so the same terms were used in the presentation. 0: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June/msg00023.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2020-June... 1: https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ https://git.github.io/rev_news/2020/07/29/edition-65/ 2: https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505 https://twitter.com/AndrewArdill/status/1350537333292949505