3 ms·

>Okay I'm not the one who advocated to change master. That's already been done. Now we have people advocating to change BACK to master. I don't believe that is

>Okay I'm not the one who advocated to change master. That's already been done. Now we have people advocating to change BACK to master. I don't believe that is what's being argued. >Also really? Audio mastering? Yes, audio mastering. The developer that created the concept of master branches in git specifically outlined his influence was from the concept of audio mastering (master recordings) [0]. >And which, pray tell, do you believe came first? Audio mastering came before git master branches. [0] https://archive.is/JB9Y8 https://archive.is/JB9Y8

consteval 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- anonfordays 2y ago
  >I don't know if you're bring purposefully obtuse, I hope not, but obviously I meant "master" came from slavery before audio, and audio took that terminology because it was already a popular word. I don't know if you're bring purposefully delusional, I hope not, but obviously I meant "master" came from master piece before audio, and audio took that terminology because it was already a popular word. Because of, you know, mastering something? >Yes audio mastering came before git, and slavery came before both. I don't even know why someone would even bother to argue otherwise. Luckily "master" in this context has absolutely nothing to do with slavery, so your comment is an immaterial non sequitur. The use of "master" in git has no historical or etymological ties to slavery whatsoever as outlined above. QED.
  - consteval 2y ago
    > The use of "master" in git has no historical or etymological ties to slavery whatsoever as outlined above. QED. Not the argument I, or anyone else, is making The use of "master" in Git may remind someone of slavery, which we don't want to do. For their sake. That's the argument actually being made and I think you'll notice it's much harder, if not impossible, to refute. That's the argument you need to target, not whatever high school debate class strawman you can come up with. Anyone can win an argument against an easy, made up argument.
    - anonfordays 2y ago
      >Not the argument I, or anyone else, is making That was the exact argument others were making. >The use of "master" in Git may remind someone of slavery, which we don't want to do. For their sake. The removal of "master" in git may remind others of fascism, which we don't want to do. For their sake. >That's the argument actually being made They'd be delusional and wrong because the etymology doesn't stem from slavery. >and I think you'll notice it's much harder, if not impossible, to refute. Just refuted it LOL! >That's the argument you need to target Just did. >whatever high school debate class strawman you can come up with. There were no strawmen in my arguments. >Anyone can win an argument against an easy, made up argument. Glad that's not what I did.
      - anonfordays 2y ago
        No response. Not surprised.

consteval 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
anonfordays 2y ago
>I don't know if you're bring purposefully obtuse, I hope not, but obviously I meant "master" came from slavery before audio, and audio took that terminology because it was already a popular word. I don't know if you're bring purposefully delusional, I hope not, but obviously I meant "master" came from master piece before audio, and audio took that terminology because it was already a popular word. Because of, you know, mastering something? >Yes audio mastering came before git, and slavery came before both. I don't even know why someone would even bother to argue otherwise. Luckily "master" in this context has absolutely nothing to do with slavery, so your comment is an immaterial non sequitur. The use of "master" in git has no historical or etymological ties to slavery whatsoever as outlined above. QED.
- consteval 2y ago
  > The use of "master" in git has no historical or etymological ties to slavery whatsoever as outlined above. QED. Not the argument I, or anyone else, is making The use of "master" in Git may remind someone of slavery, which we don't want to do. For their sake. That's the argument actually being made and I think you'll notice it's much harder, if not impossible, to refute. That's the argument you need to target, not whatever high school debate class strawman you can come up with. Anyone can win an argument against an easy, made up argument.
  - anonfordays 2y ago
    >Not the argument I, or anyone else, is making That was the exact argument others were making. >The use of "master" in Git may remind someone of slavery, which we don't want to do. For their sake. The removal of "master" in git may remind others of fascism, which we don't want to do. For their sake. >That's the argument actually being made They'd be delusional and wrong because the etymology doesn't stem from slavery. >and I think you'll notice it's much harder, if not impossible, to refute. Just refuted it LOL! >That's the argument you need to target Just did. >whatever high school debate class strawman you can come up with. There were no strawmen in my arguments. >Anyone can win an argument against an easy, made up argument. Glad that's not what I did.
    - anonfordays 2y ago
      No response. Not surprised.