4 ms·
Does this mean we can go back to using "master" as our git repo's default branch?
by OnionBlender 2y ago
Does this mean we can go back to using "master" as our git repo's default branch?
- pkkkzip 2y ago[flagged]
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago> Just the other day merely mentioning George Floyd's length criminal history and drug use But like what's the reason to bring it up unless to imply that he deserved to be killed?
- arghnoname 2y ago[flagged]
- davorak 2y agoContext matters. A rhetoric trick/trap often used is to include context, but not complete context. That trick/trap is pretty much the only way I have seen: > Floyd's length criminal history and drug use used. It a trick because people use the technique to trick people. It is a trap because people trap themselves with the technique, putting blinders on themselves.
- magicalist 2y ago> Let's take a hypothetical Why? We already have an enormous amount of context and literal video. If you think bringing it up brings "nuance" to the conversation, just say why.
- renegade-otter 2y ago"master" was not a thing even before. While I get the farce of renaming it for "social justice" reasons, it's still a stupid name. It's "trunk", as in "trunk and branches".
- snovymgodym 2y agoIt could not matter less. It's a piece of technical jargon. You learn what it means and move on. Depending on VCS and branching style, "master, "main", "mainline", or "trunk" might make more sense. "Master" always made sense to me.
- smrtinsert 2y agoYep master never made any sense
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bravetraveler 2y agoDisagree, it has been 'a thing'. Both music and film use the term 'master' for production and release. One would make new releases/mixes from masters. Much like one may branch with a repository. Now, I'll entertain conspiracy for just a moment. There might be concerning roots here with property or ownership... but if that's the case, the problem isn't with the language being descriptive of the system in which it operates. We won't 'kill all masters' by getting rid of the word. My real conspiracy theory is this is one of many attempts to sow division. Nation-state nonsense.
- renegade-otter 2y agoHaving been in the TV industry as well, it would be virtually impossible to "root out" the word "master" by any woke movement. The word is deeply entrenched there. It's everywhere. I was a little surprised when it showed up as a branch name, however. Note that there is another instance where this is used much more explicitly with "master-slave" replication. Most people don't even pause to think about that.
- 65 2y agoMy controversial opinion is that I think "main" is more descriptive and intuitive than "master."
- dijit 2y agomy controversial opinion is that it never mattered, all that really mattered was that there was a universal word- changing it to anything would cause at least a few hundred hours of development work and a few hundred additional hours of changing documents and tutorials and stuff. For what? Main isn’t better if the issue is racism, because “main” has some really negative connotations in Korea (“main” families having servant families). And, for crying out loud. the tools name is literally a mild british swear word.
- thefourthchime 2y agoGood point about the number of dev hours dedicated to this.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 2y agoThis. What makes it worse: - Each "bad" term gets replaced by multiple alternative terms, often non-obvious, so good luck figuring out what people mean now. For example, MitM (Man in the Middle) was a well established technical term. Everybody knew what was meant, the term had no acutal gender association in the meaning, but now you instead read "machine-in-the-middle, meddler-in-the-middle, manipulator-in-the-middle, person-in-the-middle (PITM), or adversary-in-the-middle (AITM)". - The "it's more descriptive" excuse was used as a very thin veil of justification even though the actual reason for the change was clear. So not only do you get to deal with the extra hundreds of hours of overhead, but you also have people lie to your face about why you're being forced to do that. - It never ends. First it was "master/slave", then "master" in any context, and once that battle was "won", proponents of such policies started finding new "offensive" words. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack#Notes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack#Notes
- wiseowise 2y ago
- int_19h 2y agoI hope not; "main" is shorter and more to the point, regardless of any DEI stuff.
- darknavi 2y agoI still rename my git remotes from origin to gh because less typing is nice.
- cryptonector 2y agoWhy not `g` then? Or `o`?
- izacus 2y agoNo, I don't think you (most likely white) scrum master would allow you to work on that change.
- anal_reactor 2y agoIn my company some repos use `master` and some use `main` so there's definitely some diversity of terminology
- LPisGood 2y agoAnd diversity was the goal all along, after all. More seriously though, it should be a policy that the change is atomic; complete or not at all.
- rvz 2y agoThe damage had already been done for Git. The master -> main change was a totally ridiculous move and caused unnecessary breakages into many tools that use Git and in internal systems. I'm still waiting for Mastercard to change their name to a less "offensive" name: [0] /s (They never did.) [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32044361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32044361
- denysvitali 2y agoMaincard
- low_tech_punk 2y agobut you might have to change it back to main when the next president shows up.
- ReptileMan 2y agoI don't know. I was told reliably that he is a fascist and this will be the last election. That democracy is on stake. And democracy obviously lost. So it may be more permanent.
- LPisGood 2y agoI think you may have reliably heard he is a fascist, which is objectively true, and confused that with unserious people saying this will be the last election.
- ReptileMan 2y agoHim being fascist is objectively false for every person that has passed 9th grade history, when fascism and WWII were studied in school. It makes as much sense as calling him juche. So calling him fascist is usually in my book indication of hypocrisy, ignorance, limited vocabulary, or lack of will to spend the five minutes it takes to understand the differences between the different types of authoritarian systems. There is no evidence that he had ever studied Il Duce or that he even knows who he is.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- monetus 2y agoJohn Kelly did say he fit the definition. The book banning thing some his base has pursued helped attach that label, imo.
- LPisGood 2y agoHe’s a right wing populist who advocates punishing political opponents, opposes the press, is extremely anti-immigrant, and advocates for adversarial territory expansion. This is by the book fascism.