Git: Change non-inclusive naming

[dscho]

A thread on the Git mailing list made the cautious attempt at bringing this issue to attention: enough names in Git are non-inclusive to cause unintended consequences. Most prominently, the default name of the default branch.

I create this ticket to track the progress of fixing this.

While I want to fix it rather sooner than later, I want to abide by the saying "If you want to go fast, go alone, if you want to go far, go together". I want to go far on this.

Any constructive comments are welcome!

[DEGoodmanWilson]

Thanks for opening this issue! I've already started on some of the necessary work at https://github.com/DEGoodmanWilson/git but not all the unit tests are passing. Would love some help! (For reference: https://twitter.com/DEGoodmanWilson/status/1269931737515282438)

[dscho]

@DEGoodmanWilson thank you for your work!

Apart from the technical side, I think this will require a good deal of gentle communication on the Git mailing list, to convince especially the maintainer (but really, all the core contributors, on whose opinions the maintainer relies a fair bit) not only that this is something they will _want_ to change, but also that they _can_ change it.

I do have a slightly personal preference for the name default instead of trunk. As a non-native speaker, the former tells me without extra explanation what this branch is about, while I do not really understand why anybody (including Subversion folks) would call their default branch "trunk".

[dscho]

@DEGoodmanWilson I cherry-picked your change, changed the trunk to default (with a fixup in builtin/remote.c because default is a keyword in C and can therefore not be a variable name), and pushed it as inclusive-naming to https://github.com/dscho/git.

Note that we'll have to address the "whitelist/blacklist" issue, too.

So far, it seems that not _too_ many tests are failing:

2020-06-08T11:16:44.4049719Z Test Summary Report
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4050241Z -------------------
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4050656Z t1400-update-ref.sh                              (Wstat: 256 Tests: 185 Failed: 5)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4050930Z   Failed tests:  96, 105-107, 109
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4051185Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4051500Z t3205-branch-color.sh                            (Wstat: 256 Tests: 4 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4051622Z   Failed test:  4
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4051853Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4052192Z t3200-branch.sh                                  (Wstat: 256 Tests: 145 Failed: 4)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4052466Z   Failed tests:  40-42, 44
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4052865Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4053109Z t3400-rebase.sh                                  (Wstat: 256 Tests: 35 Failed: 11)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4053341Z   Failed tests:  19, 22-28, 32-34
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4053559Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4053815Z t3413-rebase-hook.sh                             (Wstat: 256 Tests: 15 Failed: 6)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4054178Z   Failed tests:  5-10
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4054378Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4054629Z t4048-diff-combined-binary.sh                    (Wstat: 256 Tests: 14 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4054726Z   Failed test:  14
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4054909Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4055160Z t4013-diff-various.sh                            (Wstat: 256 Tests: 184 Failed: 73)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4055411Z   Failed tests:  49-59, 62, 64-65, 67-87, 92-109, 113-116
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4055658Z                 124-127, 130-131, 133-136, 138-139, 157-159
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4055752Z                 162
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4055937Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4056186Z t4204-patch-id.sh                                (Wstat: 256 Tests: 16 Failed: 4)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4056406Z   Failed tests:  3, 5-6, 14
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4056606Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4056840Z t5512-ls-remote.sh                               (Wstat: 256 Tests: 33 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4056934Z   Failed test:  28
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4057131Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4057379Z t5515-fetch-merge-logic.sh                       (Wstat: 256 Tests: 65 Failed: 64)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4057573Z   Failed tests:  2-65
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4057773Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4058026Z t5548-push-porcelain.sh                          (Wstat: 256 Tests: 7 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4058298Z   Failed test:  2
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4058661Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4058932Z t5516-fetch-push.sh                              (Wstat: 256 Tests: 95 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4059033Z   Failed test:  86
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4059243Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4059678Z t5701-git-serve.sh                               (Wstat: 256 Tests: 13 Failed: 3)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4059788Z   Failed tests:  7, 9, 11
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4060006Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4060279Z t6302-for-each-ref-filter.sh                     (Wstat: 256 Tests: 42 Failed: 17)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4060492Z   Failed tests:  10-26
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4060709Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4060982Z t6300-for-each-ref.sh                            (Wstat: 256 Tests: 231 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4061083Z   Failed test:  230
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4061294Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4061550Z t7405-submodule-merge.sh                         (Wstat: 0 Tests: 18 Failed: 0)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4062157Z   TODO passed:   17
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4062465Z t7608-merge-messages.sh                          (Wstat: 256 Tests: 5 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4062727Z   Failed test:  5
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4062909Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4063162Z t7400-submodule-basic.sh                         (Wstat: 256 Tests: 111 Failed: 1)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4063351Z   Failed test:  20
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4063575Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4068191Z t9903-bash-prompt.sh                             (Wstat: 256 Tests: 66 Failed: 8)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4068713Z   Failed tests:  47-48, 50-53, 55-56
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4069179Z   Non-zero exit status: 1
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4069625Z t9902-completion.sh                              (Wstat: 256 Tests: 152 Failed: 17)
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4070228Z   Failed tests:  38, 45-48, 79-81, 84, 123, 125, 129, 131-133
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4070450Z                 137, 139
2020-06-08T11:16:44.4070804Z   Non-zero exit status: 1

[dscho]

Got t1400 addressed.

[PhilipOakley]

I too was thinking about the issues raised in that post. I'd also thought "Do the 'origin' and 'master' names also cause problems because they are replicated so often?"

I'm thinking of the confusion say between upstream Git, and Git for Windows, both having a 'master' branch, so a user/dev following both will have difficulty if they try to have a 'master' branch that follows both. In that sense we should be advising everyone that having local 'master' branch is just as harmful as having too many 'goto's was in the past.

It took me a long while to realise that I should not even have a master branch, because I was not holding an authoritative copy of either Git or Git for Windows, rather I should always be starting new branches for working on issues from the respective git/master and gfw/master remote tracking branches. (this is lesson that takes a long time to learn for those of us who didn't grow up with Git 15 years ago).

I also try not to use origin as a repo name as I can never remember if, say, that's git or gfw (local short names).

I'm cautious about totally dropping the term 'master' because it does have its place when covering the idea of having mastery over a technique (e.g. those considered great painters). It should not be used as a method of denigration.

I am supportive helping users generate their own names for the upstream repository (rather than the dull, boring and uninformative origin), and that the initial checkout for a clone should be 'detached at' the upstream name, rather than being 'master'. We should use the distributed nature of git to promote diversity, rather than reinforce old misinformed habits.

Should Git for Windows have a 'master' branch, or should it be renamed? If so, to what?

[dscho]

I'm cautious about totally dropping the term 'master' because it does have its place when covering the idea of having mastery over a technique (e.g. those considered great painters). It should not be used as a method of denigration.

At this point, I don't think it matters what the intention behind the word is. It incites emotional distress. So we should move away from it.

Should Git for Windows have a 'master' branch, or should it be renamed? If so, to what?

I thought I had already answered at least the first question: yes, it will be renamed.

For the second question, I already put my vote in the hat: default.

[dscho]

@DEGoodmanWilson I force-pushed my branch with the fixes I came up with. It _should_ pass the test suite now, although I still have to address a SHA-256 issue.

[PhilipOakley]

I'm cautious about totally dropping the term 'master' because it does have its place when covering the idea of having mastery over a technique (e.g. those considered great painters). It should not be used as a method of denigration.

At this point, I don't think it matters what the intention behind the word is. It incites emotional distress. So we should move away from it.

Having seen a number of cycles of these issues go by, we also need to look behind the issue at the processes and system, and change those as well. Banning words doesn't, of itself, solve the problem. We also need to address the things (process & system) that reinforce the misuse. That includes the little things within the git processes.

Should Git for Windows have a 'master' branch, or should it be renamed? If so, to what?

I thought I had already answered at least the first question: yes, it will be renamed.

For the second question, I already put my vote in the hat: default.

I had been thinking that reference might be an alternative for the typical authoritative repos that folk fork. But that highlights the problem that it's the _process_ that is propagating the naming issue. If the primary Git for Windows branch is default, will it be recognised, and should git promulgate that name to all users who fork it. default doesn't feel authoritative (for Git for Windows). Though it does feel suitable for the 'as yet un-named' user's main branch. Maybe unnamed even?

[dscho]

@PhilipOakley I'm not aiming for perfect and complete. My aim is to get this started, with a reasonable name for starters. With that patch in hand, we can go to the Git mailing list and start some bike-shedding.

Having said that, I am pretty certain that default was one of the more obvious choices where Mercurial was just a lot smarter than Git.

[DEGoodmanWilson]

I had actually started with "default", and was told it might be triggering for folks in financial trouble? I don't actually have an opinion myself.

As for "trunk"—that's the part of the tree that holds the branches 😄

[dscho]

I didn't think of that "default" meaning...

In any case, I think that the name needs to be decided on the Git mailing list (or in a virtual summit between the core Git contributors).

I'm willing to collect suggestions over here.

[PhilipOakley]

Hi @dscho, I'm happy with default (or un-named) as the default name for the unborn branch when a repo is initialised.

It's just that default doesn't feel like the correct name for the release(?!) branch in the Git for Windows repository (a different question to the git init branch naming). I believe that Git for Windows branch is always meant to be release ready, so could be also named that (release), though I had initially thought of reference. I'm sure there are other choices.

For the git init, IIUC, the template directory option has nothing to allow the initial branch to be named - it only provides initial content to the repo. (I've yet to check the proposed code to see which parts are adjusted at this stage)

However, that does create a difference in naming between the default branch name, and that of any upstream reference branch, made worse for users by the GitHub fork duplication process. I was mainly pointing out the naming issues at the cloning/forking/fetching level, and hence the implicit issues in users setting up their refspecs etc.

Does that help clarify anything?

[DEGoodmanWilson]

One of the things I wanted to experiment with in my branch was not hard coding the default, but letting it be a configuration option. This might be a good stepping stone in an iterative approach, and also allow people to use the terms best suited for their communities. It’s more work of course, but hardly beyond our skills.

[derrickstolee]

One of the things I wanted to experiment with in my branch was not hard coding the default, but letting it be a configuration option.

I actually went searching for this, but did not find anything in the docs. In addition, having a GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH environment variable could allow us to identify the tests that need to be updated (and include a way to transition tests on a script-by-script basis).

[DEGoodmanWilson]

master is hard coded into git init.

[dscho]

I believe that Git for Windows branch is always meant to be release ready, so could be also named that (release)

It is indeed meant to be release-ready at all times. However, actual releases are typically built from PR branches (most recently, refs/pull/2645/head). I therefore would fine release a bit misleading.

having a GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH environment variable could allow us to identify the tests that need to be updated

That sounds like a good idea.

In practice, I found a couple tests that require reordering lines so that the branch names are ordered alphabetically, which will be made quite a bit harder if we allow for arbitrary default branch names to be configured.

master is hard coded into git init.

@DEGoodmanWilson yes, I think what @derrickstolee wanted to suggest is to _introduce_ that environment variable, imitating other GIT_TEST_* environment variables meant to facilitate testing.

Having said that, given the complications with the practical aspects of implementing such a thing, I am unsure whether it is worth it, especially if the Git mailing list likely wants to pick a new, still hard-coded name.

[dscho]

In practice, I found a couple tests that require reordering lines so that the branch names are ordered alphabetically, which will be made quite a bit harder if we allow for arbitrary default branch names to be configured.

It's actually even worse: some tests verify output that is aligned, and changes with the name of the longest shown branch name...

[derrickstolee]

I don't mean that the test suite should be resilient to any value of GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH. What I mean is that we can update test scripts by setting GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH=<new-default> at the beginning of a script, then change the expected output to match what the expected new behavior is. This can happen in small patches.

When the patches are done, then we can change the hard-coded value and delete the GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH environment variable.

Step 1: Create GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH.
Step 2: Update t000*.sh with GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH=X
Step 3. Update t001*.sh with GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH=X
...
Step _N_: Update t9*.sh with GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH=X
Step _N_+1: Update default branch name
Step _N_ + 2: Delete GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_BRANCH

[dscho]

@derrickstolee ah, that's a clever plan.

FWIW I managed to fix all remaining test failures in my inclusive-naming branch: https://github.com/dscho/git/actions/runs/129071782

Having said that, I now have second thoughts about using the name default, leaning more towards main. Thoughts?

[mfriedrich74]

Didn't one of you called it the users main branch? Why not calling so? Main
or usermain?

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020, 6:32 PM Johannes Schindelin [e-mail]
wrote:

@derrickstolee https://github.com/derrickstolee ah, that's a clever
plan.

FWIW I managed to fix all remaining test failures in my inclusive-naming
branch: https://github.com/dscho/git/actions/runs/129071782

Having said that, I now have second thoughts about using the name default,
leaning more towards main. Thoughts?

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/2674#issuecomment-640922052,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABZH5SAJ24ANNYXV7MIJDNLRVVRIFANCNFSM4NYII56A
.

[dkunkler]

Personal preference for main, but recognized it's just that; a personal preference, from my anecdotal history.

[derrickstolee]

I was pointed to this StackOverflow answer that uses the templates to rename the default branch on the client side, by the way.

[DEGoodmanWilson]

There is a lot of bike-shedding over what the default branch name should be. And existing projects have their own standards. I take this as a good reason to implement setting the default branch name as a config option, something I've been working on this morning. Nothing to share yet, because I'm still trying to understand how the git config system generates default values for un-configured options.

Then we can just use "main" or whatever, and let folks who want to use something else on future projects set a config option. The templatedir trick is a neat hack, but still far too complex for most folks I believe.

[dscho]

Personal preference for main, but recognized it's just that; a personal preference, from my anecdotal history.

Yes, even the thread on the Git mailing list I mentioned above suggests main. It does seem to be popular, so I think we should go with that.

My current plan is to solicit a bit more feedback on the Git and Git for Windows mailing lists, whether there are strong objections (with convincing reasons) against renaming to main, and then do that in Git for Windows' space.

I was pointed to this StackOverflow answer that uses the templates to rename the default branch on the client side, by the way.

Sure, that works, brian pointed that out in the reply to above-mentioned thread. It is a bit cumbersome, though, _and_ it adds the confusing "re-initializing" message.

There is a lot of bike-shedding over what the default branch name should be.

Yes, there is. I do hope, though, that we can settle on a reasonable name in a reasonable time frame as far as Git for Windows is concerned, and then (re-)start the conversation on the Git mailing list to change the default within Git itself.

I take this as a good reason to implement setting the default branch name as a config option, something I've been working on this morning.

I guess you managed to convince me. The really neat part is that this ties nicely in with @derrickstolee's suggestion to adjust the test suite one by one. The config option and GIT_TEST_* setting can come first, then the tests are adjusted one by one, and in the end the default is flipped and all those GIT_TEST_* assignments in the test scripts go away. Then the documentation patches can follow.

Nothing to share yet, because I'm still trying to understand how the git config system generates default values for un-configured options.

@DEGoodmanWilson Oh, please do share a WIP, I am likely to be able to assist. FWIW I do hang out in https://gitter.im/git-for-windows/git if you want to chat.

[dscho]

FWIW I plan on tagging https://github.com/git/git/compare/master...dscho:inclusive-naming (so that we have it for future reference) and then re-working it to rename the default branch to main instead.

Just to have something in hand when calling a Virtual Git Contributor Summit for Inclusive Naming.

[dscho]

Personal preference for main, but recognized it's just that; a personal preference, from my anecdotal history.

Yes, even the thread on the Git mailing list I mentioned above suggests main. It does seem to be popular, so I think we should go with that.

Seems that other thought leaders agree with this, e.g. https://www.hanselman.com/blog/EasilyRenameYourGitDefaultBranchFromMasterToMain.aspx

[DEGoodmanWilson]

@dscho I've got a working MVP here: https://github.com/DEGoodmanWilson/git/tree/default-branch-name-option

No tests, or docs, or checks that this doesn't break anything. Also, I am a little lost on the string pointer ownership conventions in git, so I _know_ I've got a memory safety issue as well (which I've tagged with a comment, config.c:2376).

[derrickstolee]

@dscho I've got a working MVP here: https://github.com/DEGoodmanWilson/git/tree/default-branch-name-option

@DEGoodmanWilson thanks for the MVP. I added some comments to the commit https://github.com/DEGoodmanWilson/git/commit/d2a68b0c1752fc0ff01cbca044f50679438d1330. You will also need to update the commit message to be more in-line with Git community guidelines. See https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#polish-your-commits for more information here.

[dscho]

@dscho I've got a working MVP here: https://github.com/DEGoodmanWilson/git/tree/default-branch-name-option

No tests, or docs, or checks that this doesn't break anything. Also, I am a little lost on the string pointer ownership conventions in git, so I _know_ I've got a memory safety issue as well (which I've tagged with a comment, config.c:2376).

For the record, I talked @DEGoodmanWilson into opening a PR at https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/653 and I commented liberally.

This is pretty exciting for me. I care deeply about helping Git become more inclusive, and I am delighted to see so much support.

[dscho]

For the record, I tagged yesterday's work of mine to rename the default branch name to default here: https://github.com/dscho/git/releases/tag/inclusive-naming-default (I intend to leave that tag there for eternity).

Now I'm off trying to edit the patches to use main instead.

[ptrait0695]

For years I was troubled by bullies calling me git. I would like if you could change the name of your version control system, as I find it very offensive.

[olearycrew]

In parallel to these efforts upstream, we're considering this approach at GitLab as well: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/220906

[mlvzk]

Agreed. On a side note, GitHub should maintain a repository with a list of developers that still use the master/slave terminology. Perhaps that'd be enough of an incentive for some to change - name and shame!
We could also have an icon on their profile page that'd flag them as dangerous.

[sentiment-bot[bot]]

Please be sure to review the code of conduct and be respectful of other users. cc/ @git-for-windows/trusted-git-for-windows-developers
Keep in mind, this repository uses the Contributor Covenant.

[6gk]

@mlvzk I completely agree.

On a related topic, how would I go about changing the master branch (I feel disgusted just hearing that word) on all my repos? I've never been good with git.

[derrickstolee]

On a related topic, how would I go about changing the master branch (I feel disgusted just hearing that word) on all my repos? I've never been good with git.

@GaugeK: The best source I know about on this topic is @shanselman's blog post. Good luck!

[lpar]

On a related topic, how would I go about changing the master branch (I feel disgusted just hearing that word) on all my repos? I've never been good with git.

I hacked together a script. Requires the hub GitHub command line tool.
https://gist.github.com/lpar/c74f661a17d52b942bfb8b1fd1496972

I assume it would work in WSL.

[6gk]

@derrickstolee I have just updated my linux dotfiles repo to use inclusive branch names.

https://github.com/GaugeK/polka

It seems to work well, I'll go ahead and update the rest of my repos. Thank you!

[mlvzk]

@GaugeK I starred your repo. This behavior should be promoted more! Thank you!

[sentiment-bot[bot]]

Please be sure to review the code of conduct and be respectful of other users. cc/ @git-for-windows/trusted-git-for-windows-developers
Keep in mind, this repository uses the Contributor Covenant.

[derrickstolee]

Keep in mind, this repository uses the Contributor Covenant.

I deleted some comments that were purposefully derogatory and non-constructive. This is an open forum to share thoughts on this change, but follow the Code of Conduct or your comments will be removed.

[6gk]

On a related topic, how would I go about changing the master branch (I feel disgusted just hearing that word) on all my repos? I've never been good with git.

I hacked together a script. Requires the hub GitHub command line tool.
https://gist.github.com/lpar/c74f661a17d52b942bfb8b1fd1496972

I assume it would work in WSL.

I use linux as my main OS (Yes, I know, why am I here?), so naturally I have a bit of experience shell scripting

The case statement that checks for the url type appears to be useless, since url_type isn't used anywhere (And if hub checked for it, it wouldn't detect it since it wasn't exported), and using echo "$(<command>)" is useless, you can safely remove echo "$( and )"

So:

echo "$(hub api -t -XPATCH 'repos/{owner}/{repo}' -f default_branch="trunk")" > /dev/null

gets changed to

hub api -t -XPATCH 'repos/{owner}/{repo}' -f default_branch="trunk" > /dev/null

The script also doesn't use any so-called bashisms, so you can replace the top line with #!/bin/sh -e, and because of -e you can remove the set -e line. (This is good practice since bash isn't required to be in /bin, but sh is, and bash is also slower than sh on a lot of distributions (On others, bash and sh are the same), which shouldn't matter for a script like this where the bottleneck would be networking, but still...)

My edited version: http://0x0.st/iVvA.bin

[PhilipOakley]

I believe that Git for Windows branch is always meant to be
release ready, so could be also named that (release)

It is indeed meant to be release-ready at all times. However, actual
releases are typically built from PR branches (most recently,
refs/pull/2645/head). I therefore would fine release a bit misleading.

True, I just felt it worth mentioning as an option for the lead/primary
branch (as distinct from the use of default as Git's initial branch name)

[dscho]

This is an open forum to share thoughts on this change, but follow the Code of Conduct or your comments will be removed.

Yes, and we need to protect this as a safe space to express thoughts _respectfully_. As such, I have no objections to blocking users who add comments that are obviously in disagreement with our Code of Conduct.

[PhilipOakley]

On 10/06/2020 15:33, mlvzk wrote:

• name and shame!
  Unfortunately that approach would be a vicious circle, rather than a
  virtuous circle of improvement. It can be a form of bullying.

Let's keep this work positive and supportive.

[roberto-t92]

At this point, I don't think it matters what the intention behind the word is. It incites emotional distress. So we should move away from it.

Do you have a psychiatrist evaluation to backup this claim?

[PhilipOakley]

@roberto-t92 Try https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2015/12/02/harvard-princeton-abolish-master/ for an older report about the 'micro-aggression' issues.

Emotional responses are not a "psychiatrist evaluation" level concern. They often reflect a set of wider external issues that also need to be addressed.

[matteo-mosca]

You are, respectfully, out of your mind. It's a technical known and widespread term, stop giving racism so much spotlight and MAYBE we will make a step in the right direction. Leave this stuff alone. Stop forcing your ideas on others. Just stop.

[essial]

Sounds great, unfortunately beyond making master and main a mnemonic for each other, I don't see how this can really be a thing. How many hundreds of thousands of public, not to mention private, shell scripts, apps, daemons, jobs, etc use the existing branch terminology? What happens if a project already has a master and main branch? What about all the people with master upstreams?

I'm totally in support for the BLM movement, but I'm not convinced this change is technically feasible in the near term (read: years).

[Tweetdezweet]

Here is my 2 cents on this.

This change could cost the global developer community millions of dollars to handle the changes while it doesn't solve the issue of slavery or racism.
Currently there are more people enslaved that there were ever in the past. Which is horrific.

If we as developers want to affect a real change, wouldn't it make more sense if we donate our time or money to organizations that actively fight to help current day slaves?
That at least would make a real difference in people's lives, slaves are undergoing horrific treatment so it doesn't make sense to me to spend energy, time or money on the word.

Although well intended, it will only make some developers feel better but it won't affect any change that warrants the extreme high cost of implementing such a change.

[MarkTiedemann]

I always assumed that, in the context of version control, the word "master" refers to the "master copy" (https://www.lexico.com/definition/master_copy), which is not a racist term.

[kauedg]

Words have more than one meaning. It's meaning depends on the context.

"Master document" is the original of a document, to tell it apart from copies. It doesn't mean it's copies are slaves.
"Master Yoda" means he's skilled and has an apprentice. Obi-wan Kenobi was not his slave.

I could go on and on. By no stretch of imagination the term "master branch" describes a slavery relationship and that's enough to make a statement, if this is the goal. People should stop seeing things unidimensionally, reflect and consider that the world and our words are much more complex than the reason for this issue.

If we take the reasoning away there's nothing left but tyrant-like lists of what we can or cannot say. Stop this madness.

[bermannoah]

As far as I can tell the idea is not to hard-override every single git config everywhere forever amen, if you want to use “master” nobody’s going to come to your house and personally make you change. The notion is to change the _default_, so that when creating new repos it’s inclusive by default. Don’t like it? Fine, change the default branch back to master. As an industry we’ve somehow managed to redefine “crypto” to mean “a currency” rather than “cryptography,” I am sure we will all survive renaming the default branch in a git repo to something that isn’t deliberately connected to the master + slave relationship. It is _quite literally_ the least we can do.

[lpar]

A few quick responses to some points:

I always assumed that, in the context of version control, the word "master" refers to the "master copy"

The Git terminology is derived from BitKeeper. Yes, it's a master-slave metaphor.

But even if it wasn't, ultimately it doesn't matter. "Cock" is the accepted term for a male bird, but you'd probably be wary of using it in your project name, right?

What happens if a project already has a master and main branch?

Then it can carry on doing whatever it likes. This is about changing the default when you don't have any existing branches.

If we as developers want to affect a real change, wouldn't it make more sense if we donate our time or money to organizations that actively fight to help current day slaves?

It's not either/or, we can do both. For instance, I already buy slavery-free chocolate and coffee. How about you?

If we take the reasoning away there's nothing left but tyrant-like lists of what we can or cannot say.

Nobody's telling you what you can or cannot say. If you want to keep using a 'master' branch, or go even further and use a racist slur as your main source code branch name, go ahead! This is about the default for those who don't choose to do something else.

[xnox]

@dscho I am happy to change the default branch name in Ubuntu too. I like "main" as a name too.

I am failing to find the branch which has the patches to change the default name, with tests passing and/or reduced number of regressions. Can you please point me at a branch that is the latest development in that area.

[kauedg]

Nobody's telling you what you can or cannot say.

Read the whole sentence. "IF we take the reasoning away"*. And that's what is being done here, reducing a word to one shallow dualistic political meaning even though it has other suitable and acceptable meanings. It's just one statement away.

I don't really care about the branch's name, I care about the reason the change is being made.

• if ... then constructs shouldn't be a problem here.

The Git terminology is derived from BitKeeper. Yes, it's a master-slave metaphor.
But even if it wasn't, ultimately it doesn't matter. "Cock" is the accepted term for a male bird, but you'd probably be wary of using it in your project name, right?

Well there is a product called "Bengay" which has nothing to do with "gay"... just to name one. So your argument is really dull and kind of childish.

But even if it wasn't, ultimately it doesn't matter.

That's all folks.

[Tweetdezweet]

I "love" how we are debating a word that makes a handful of people feel bad despite it having nothing to do with slavery...
Maybe, just maybe that means it's those people that have a problem instead of the word that is debated...

We all know where this stuff comes from and it's nothing but virtue signalling.
I really wish that we could leave (identity) politics out of technical debates.

But I know, people need a safe space... but how about the people that don't feel safe at all in an environment that caters to the PC police?
I sure don't.

[DavidHofstee]

If you are new to Git, things are difficult to understand. All documentation that is available, that is not under Github control, refers to master.

I am pretty sure that having a setting, which will result in a lot of different-named-master-branches, will greatly interfere with people trying to learn Git.

[AlexAegis]

Language is a wonderful, continuously evolving thing. Meaning of words change over time. For examle 300 years ago the word "terrific" meant the exact opposite as now.

Just because a word is "tainted" does not mean it should be completely thrown out. With this behaviour you only cement the relation between slavery and the word "master". It's counter-productive.

[PhilipOakley]

"master copy"

That's an oxymoron. Git users should know that the old fashioned 'version control' of a 'master' drawing is completely invalid for the perfect reproduction that occurs within computer storage. I do remember the smell of blue prints, the employment of tracers, and the change from 'drawing control' to 'parts control' (just as hard to explain...).

The key benefit of Git is that all the control (in the historic VCS terminology) has gone (it's been 'distributed') and has been replaced by the verifiability of the hash (sha1 is still surviving for Git). My copy of hash X is as good as anyone's.

Removing the inappropriate 'master' term could also benefit the comprehension of distributed version verification.

[waruyama]

At this point, I don't think it matters what the intention behind the word is. It incites emotional distress.

Are you sure about this? Are universities planning to rename the master's degree? I would assume that colleges and universities to be the first to take action if the word by itself really incited emotional distress. But somehow I do not see a discussion there.

[PhilipOakley]

I'm not convinced this change is technically feasible in the near term

@essial Up thread it was noted that some initial work that had looked through the majority of the changes required and tagged https://github.com/dscho/git/releases/tag/inclusive-naming-default at that time.

Bigger projects within Git have been done successfully, and the hash transition is progressing well (a much much bigger project)

[lloan]

Are you all seriously going to gloss over the fact that the number of downvotes exceeds the support for this change? How does this further the ability of developers to work? As a brown person, this is not doing me any favors or making my life better, just putting that out there. But please tell me how this is going to make my job easier. I'd rather see some cool tools being built to help me do things faster.

[Tweetdezweet]

Are you all seriously going to gloss over the fact that the number of downvotes exceeds the support for this change? How does this further the ability of developers to work? As a brown person, this is not doing me any favors or making my life better, just putting that out there. But please tell me how this is going to make my job easier. I'd rather see some cool tools being built to help me do things faster.

Seems so, I think the time where major changes in community driven projects depended on the majority of the community wanting those changes is done...
This is what has happens when you allow the thought police to force their political views on others and it seems they once again will prevail because... can't think of a rational reason tbh :(

[Tweetdezweet]

If we as developers want to affect a real change, wouldn't it make more sense if we donate our time or money to organizations that actively fight to help current day slaves?

It's not either/or, we can do both. For instance, I already buy slavery-free chocolate and coffee. How about you?

Almost missed your reply...
Sure we can do both, but isn't it weird that except for those that oppose the word police no one starts off with actually making a change?

Stating you already buy slavery-free chocolate and coffee is nice but you showed your hand when you followed it up with the question "How about you?"

Nice virtue signalling there, phrasing it like that...
So thanks for proving what everyone knows is happening here...
No real substance here, no solution to an actual problem, no care for actual slaves.

I would love to see the conversation between those playing these silly word games and a recently actual freed slave...
If you truly think they care that you changed a word in support of them while you could have made an actual difference... you have no idea what a horrific life they live.

The reality is that this sort of action will only make those that came up with it and support it feel better and they can pat themselves on the shoulder say how awesome they are...

If that's your way of handling issues, no problem but when you start to interfere with the lives of others simply because you can't find a real impactful way to feel better about things...
NO!

The majority of devs I talk to are sick and tired of having identity politics dragged into our environment, an environment that is all about logic and rational thinking.
But we risk being ostracized when we speak up or oppose the push for dragging identity politics into our field... by those that claim they want to be inclusive...

This sort of thing is destroying the sense of community, I know more devs that are no longer willing to participate in conferences simply due to these radical left wing policies being forced down everyone's throats.

And the MO is well known, become member of a "tech" organization that hosts conferences and then start bullying the other organizers into implementing these identity politics driven policies...

[kencinder]

This issue IS virtue signaling. Ever heard of something called context? The words in use have ZERO racial context.

[boriskar]

like for real guys, you believe this is how you defeat racism?
not that I even understand where the racism is hiding here.
maybe we should remove the words "master" or "default" from the dictionary itself, ah?
this will surely solve our problems.

[jurij]

Yep, thats enough internet for today

[PenguinNexus]

Although well intended, this is going to break a lot more than it will solve. Please reconsider.

[Beilog]

People with too much free time and nothing better to do, but to find every little thing a meaning. Seriously, better go and find something smart, constitutional to do then to find meaningless and small nonissues to fix... Master and slave have their own meanings and it isn't connected to slavery or racism in any way shape or form. You are just looking for some way to prove something to yourself. I don't think this is the right place or platform to do so. Go back to facebook or other social media, or better yet go see a psychologist.

[gargoyle]

I have practiced this art that we call coding for 30 years - If I may be so bold as to call myself a master craftsman.

Reflecting back on all those years spent behind the keyboard, all those lines of code, I have never heard of anything so utterly ridiculous.

The original poster couldn't even bring themselves to mention the word master like it was something out of a Harry Potter movie - "the branch that shall not be named".

Yes, emotions are high all over the world right now. Yes, the technology sector has at times made heavy use of the master/slave terminology which I can see might be uncomfortable for some. This is not one of those times though. There is absolutely zero connection to the current affairs here.

We simply must not take a single word out of context and refuse to use it.

[Cellane]

On a side note, GitHub should maintain a repository with a list of developers that still use the master/slave terminology. Perhaps that'd be enough of an incentive for some to change - name and shame!
We could also have an icon on their profile page that'd flag them as dangerous.

@mlvzk I like this idea a lot. I wonder what icon would be a good indicator of these dangerous users. What do you think of a yellow star?

[johananl]

When you actively look for things which may potentially be construed as offensive, you are guaranteed to find them everywhere. Furthermore, it is technically impossible to communicate information without offending anyone, and this becomes more true the larger the audience is. While I do see sense in avoiding specific terms which are strongly and unequivocally related (!) to racism (e.g. someone trying to name a project "klan"), this one is so far fetched that it's honestly hard to take seriously. You can literally take any word and make something offensive out of it. To demonstrate this, should I contact the Rails maintainers and ask them to change the project's name because it reminds me of my Jewish ancestors' fate in WW2?

[dscho]

I am failing to find the branch which has the patches to change the default name, with tests passing and/or reduced number of regressions. Can you please point me at a branch that is the latest development in that area.

@xnox I opened this ticket with the idea to rename the main branches in the repositories in https://github.com/git-for-windows, and as such, there are no patches.

But I also started the effort to change the default main branch name (e.g. when running git init) in core Git (i.e. not only in Git for Windows). The initial set of patches, which only adds a config option to let you choose a different name, is here: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/656. On top of this, I am building the patches that will change the hard-coded default to main here: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/655.

Are you all seriously going to gloss over the fact that the number of downvotes exceeds the support for this change?

No, this is not a "glossing over". At the same time, the people voting in this ticket are not representative of the community. The community has actually spoken loudly and clearly, see e.g. the references in https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-term-to-avoid-slavery-references/.

Besides, "don't change the name because it does not upset me" is not really a convincing argument, and it is the only one I heard so far against changing to more inclusive naming.

Most importantly, I will not dismiss the fact that all of the people who are speaking up in this here thread obviously feel safe to do so.

The reactions I read in private speak a very different language. It makes me even more convinced that we need to do something to make Git for Windows a more inclusive project.

In closing, I would like to remind everybody posting here that this project has a code of conduct that not only active contributors are expected to follow. We want to invite everybody, and expect in return that the same respect we pledge to extend is extended back. There cannot be any mistake that we will block users who choose to violate that code of conduct.

[aleksapetrovic2907]

'Motherboard' reminds me of my mother, who has died in a car accident 25 years ago.
'Hard disk' is offensive to people with erectile dysfunction.
'USB' is offensive to dyslexic people who cant ride the bus.
'Memory' is offensive to people with alzheimers.

[johananl]

Agreed. On a side note, GitHub should maintain a repository with a list of developers that still use the master/slave terminology. Perhaps that'd be enough of an incentive for some to change - name and shame!
We could also have an icon on their profile page that'd flag them as dangerous.

It's good that we got an example of what could happen when you pursue this line of thought to the end.

@mlvzk after you've marked the undesirables with a badge at the color of your choice and concentrated them in one place, I'm wondering how you would continue from there. Care to share?

[vearutop]

I would like to note that slavery is not only white vs black, there were plenty of cases when white people enslaved white people. As a descendant of white slaves I strongly object against the proposed change. And also please refrain from taking racial ownership of commonly owned slavery.

[AlexAegis]

@dscho how are we not the community? How are the people having a concern in an open ended discussion is not representative? And how is that article based on a few people's tweets is representative of the community? If anything the original mailing list, the sparked reddit discussion and this issue here is what's representative.

We are the community, and we speak loud and clearly. You can't dismiss us just because it's opposing you.

If you really want to see what the community wants, open a poll.

[johananl]

I didn't think of that "default" meaning...

In any case, I think that the name needs to be decided on the Git mailing list (or in a virtual summit between the core Git contributors).

I'm willing to collect suggestions over here.

@dscho you may want to be more careful with your words. The word "core" may be a trigger word for army veterans with PTSD (because "corps" in "marine corps" is pronounced exactly like "core"). Would you please edit your comment to avoid potentially offending users?

[TheAifam5]

Just don’t. I encourage to close this issue and mark as invalid. I feel like trolls getting what they want like with santa hat in VSCode. Everyone can change their branch names as they want, but don’t force it. Don’t fell under troll/media pressure, especially media which never used Git or even GitHub in their entire life and writing sh*t about it.

[kauedg]

[BanchouBoo]

Github still has an ICE contract and this is what y'all choose to be upset about?

[smileatom]

The words "more inclusive", is really just weasel words. It means that git is "excluding people" by using the master branch name. We know this is absolutely not true. And yet she persists.

[ashkan-pm]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
Us in this part of the world are being driven to suicide, is this not racism? We have to put up with our own government, getting killed by the thousands while protesting for the most basic forms of freedom. We have to deal with the economy cause, with 6 years of working as a full time developer, our currency has depreciated so much we can't afford to rent a small apartment. Men, women and children from countries near us are killed everyday. And we all are still doing what we love which is coding.
If most of you were in our shoes for a day you would lose your minds.
And this is what the community spends its time debating. Equality, justice and comfort for all (except for people in the Middle East and Africa)

[kauedg]

At the same time, the people voting in this ticket are not representative of the community.

Just check the first message in this issue. Now come back and read this again.
"Representative members of the community" is defined by "those who agree".

[Tweetdezweet]

I am failing to find the branch which has the patches to change the default name, with tests passing and/or reduced number of regressions. Can you please point me at a branch that is the latest development in that area.

@xnox I opened this ticket with the idea to rename the main branches in the repositories in https://github.com/git-for-windows, and as such, there are no patches.

But I also started the effort to change the default main branch name (e.g. when running git init) in core Git (i.e. not only in Git for Windows). The initial set of patches, which only adds a config option to let you choose a different name, is here: gitgitgadget#656. On top of this, I am building the patches that will change the hard-coded default to main here: gitgitgadget#655.

Are you all seriously going to gloss over the fact that the number of downvotes exceeds the support for this change?

No, this is not a "glossing over". At the same time, the people voting in this ticket are not representative of the community. The community has actually spoken loudly and clearly, see e.g. the references in https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-term-to-avoid-slavery-references/.

Besides, "don't change the name because it does not upset me" is not really a convincing argument, and it is the only one I heard so far against changing to more inclusive naming.

Most importantly, I will not dismiss the fact that all of the people who are speaking up in this here thread obviously feel safe to do so.

The reactions I read in private speak a very different language. It makes me even more convinced that we need to do something to make Git for Windows a more inclusive project.

In closing, I would like to remind everybody posting here that this project has a code of conduct that not only active contributors are expected to follow. We want to invite everybody, and expect in return that the same respect we pledge to extend is extended back. There cannot be any mistake that we will block users who choose to violate that code of conduct.

How about launching a poll instead of relying on an article?
Tweets aren't representative in any way shape or form.
Especially considering a lot of people opposing the left wing extremists get banned.
Or the fact that people are being bullied into keeping their mouth shut on this ideology?

No matter how you feel, at the end of the day you KNOW your virtual signalling isn't appreciated anywhere near as much as you would like.
Hence your mentioning of the code of conduct, which you seemed to forget all about when someone is suggesting to blackmail people into agreeing with this silly non-solution by creating a list of devs opposing this. A list meant to spread word that those devs are something they are not...

Do you have any idea how upsetting it is to me to keep running into this nonsensical ideology?
Especially since it's using fascist tactics to achieve an unattainable goal...

These non-issues keep raised over and over again, just like the nonsensical codes of conduct which are written so that anyone breaks it, reading it aloud to another community member is technically breaking those codes of conduct.

YOU are welcome in the community, your bullying and your divisive and destructive ideology pushed by a handful of people that seem to love fascist tactics is not!

[ljmerza]

Let's take a guess on how many people who made this decision that using "master" as the default branch name was offense are white. 🙄

[lloan]

No, this is not a "glossing over". At the same time, the people voting in this ticket are not representative of the community. The community has actually spoken loudly and clearly, see e.g. the references in https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-term-to-avoid-slavery-references/.

I feel excluded right here. 🙄

[rluvaton]

Why nobody talk about how this change will break the internet, CI System, GitHub Actions, monitoring, scripts, badge and so much more depending on the master term.

[bkellerman]

Are we just going to pretend that 'git push' doesn't glorify violence?

[animeshg93]

Are you all seriously going to gloss over the fact that the number of downvotes exceeds the support for this change?

No, this is not a "glossing over". At the same time, the people voting in this ticket are not representative of the community. The community has actually spoken loudly and clearly, see e.g. the references in https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-term-to-avoid-slavery-references/.

Besides, "don't change the name because it does not upset me" is not really a convincing argument, and it is the only one I heard so far against changing to more inclusive naming.

Most importantly, I will not dismiss the fact that all of the people who are speaking up in this here thread obviously feel safe to do so.

The reactions I read in private speak a very different language. It makes me even more convinced that we need to do something to make Git for Windows a more inclusive project.

In closing, I would like to remind everybody posting here that this project has a code of conduct that not only active contributors are expected to follow. We want to invite everybody, and expect in return that the same respect we pledge to extend is extended back. There cannot be any mistake that we will block users who choose to violate that code of conduct.

@dscho

1. How has the word 'master', which refers to the true copy of code, ever harmed anyone?
2. Why was it not a problem, up until now? Just because some people find that offensive due to recent events, should you take action to remove it just to pacify them at the risk of alienating a majority of your users?
3. 'master', 'blacklist', 'whitelist' have ZERO racial connotations. The only people who see any racist undertones in these words are actual racists.
4. We ARE the community. We are developers who have repose here. We see literally no reason for trying to bring racial agendas in technology. If we had all agreed with you, would you have considered us representative of this community?
5. Literally everyone's argument to this change is that politics don't belong in code. It doesn't upset us that you are changing the name. It upsets us because you are doing so for incredibly shallow reasons, the change will do literally next to nothing, and you are turning a deaf ear to our opinions (a majority of which are against this change).

You're worried about making your colleagues feel safer/more comfortable. How about the rest of us upon whom you are forcing this change, or keeping tabs on? Does our safety/comfort not mean anything?

Please don't refer the "code of conduct" as a reason to delete opposing views. If you can't stomach the thought that a majority of Github users are against this change, then delete this incredibly ridiculous issue.

[jglathe]

Okay, absolute bollocks, masterfully contained to one issue thread to keep the rest of git from being infected. Hats off to @dscho

[smileatom]

The idea that you would possibly break a universe of tooling, scripts, plugins, documentation, and possibly git itself to accomplish exactly nothing, for reasons that are false on the face of it, is the opposite of what software development is about. Its not broken. So dont "fix" it.

[Shadasviar]

Just rename blacklist to afroamerican list, it would be enough.

[auricgoldfinger]

"I think that's offensive, Master Yoda, to call you master"
"Patience you must have my young Padawan. Always git checkout -b apprentice origin/master you can. Get rid of the master you can. Focus on the apprentice you can. But remember. Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."

[dscho]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
Us in this part of the world are being driven to suicide, is this not racism? We have to put up with our own government, getting killed by the thousands while protesting for the most basic forms of freedom. We have to deal with the economy cause, with 6 years of working as a full time developer, our currency has depreciated so much we can't afford to rent a small apartment. Men, women and children from countries near us are killed everyday. And we all are still doing what we love which is coding.
If most of you were in our shoes for a day you would lose your minds.

@ashkan-pm Thank you for sharing this very personal note. I hear your pain even if I have no means to truly understand the depth of it.

I benefit every day from this kind of injustice. Changing the main branch name of Git for Windows' own repositories is but a tiny thing in the big endeavor of trying to address some of said injustice. It may be tiny, but at least it is something under my control. And obviously I won't stop there.

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

I want to hear more perspectives like yours. That's why I pledge to the code of conduct we adopted. That's why I work actively on making this a safer place. Because ultimately, it is not about me. I might have a tiny part in making this world a better place, but ultimately, it's about all of us ("us", as in every person in this world).

[matteo-mosca]

You are, respectfully, out of your mind. It's a technical known and widespread term, stop giving racism so much spotlight and MAYBE we will make a step in the right direction. Leave this stuff alone. Stop forcing your ideas on others. Just stop.

"This content has been marked as disruptive". How is this disruptive? Just because I disagree with this? Also stop saying that the people who downvote are not representative of the community. We are the community. We are developers.

[smileatom]

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

First of all, I take serious exception to that. Have you heard of China and India?, Pakistan? South America? There are massive numbers of non-whites (you seem to be obsessed with race for some reason), participating in open source projects.

Second, there is no such thing as "overrepresentation" in a free society. If you WANT to do something, have a passion for it, and are free to do it, you cant be "overrepresented".

Are you suggesting now that github for example should have race quotas? Your comments are the comments of an activist, not a software engineer. You really shouldn't step into the macro space without understanding that software people are generally free people, and non-software people are also generally free people. There is no competition between races in software unless you choose to myopically view it that way.

Your use of language to cover your tracks is really giving way to things that would be best not spoken. Because they aren't true in the context, meaning, or intention of what we as software developers care about. But if you want to be a media correspondent, Im sure you will find an enthralled audience.

[Richardk2n]

Some people are so focused on doing "something", that they force it. They do something that has next to no benefit while having huge disadvantages just so they did "something", because "we have to start somewhere". Please don't be like that. You achieve nothing, break a lot of things and make people hate your cause.

[Shadasviar]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
Us in this part of the world are being driven to suicide, is this not racism? We have to put up with our own government, getting killed by the thousands while protesting for the most basic forms of freedom. We have to deal with the economy cause, with 6 years of working as a full time developer, our currency has depreciated so much we can't afford to rent a small apartment. Men, women and children from countries near us are killed everyday. And we all are still doing what we love which is coding.
If most of you were in our shoes for a day you would lose your minds.
And this is what the community spends its time debating. Equality, justice and comfort for all (except for people in the Middle East and Africa)

I agree with you. In Russia and countries around it, police rape, beat, bull and kill just random people on streets every day, and whole world do nothing. Only black lives in USA matters for modern democracy world. Git maintainers probably think that it is not racism, when one race is more equal than rest of world.

[animeshg93]

@dscho

I benefit every day from this kind of injustice. Changing the main branch name of Git for Windows' own repositories is but a tiny thing in the big endeavor of trying to address some of said injustice. It may be tiny, but at least it is something under my control. And obviously I won't stop there.

What will making this change do to help the black community?

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

So? If more white men are interested in open source, is that a problem? I did not know that open source had color quotas. I thought open source projects relied on good developers, regardless of skin color, to make the project better for everyone else.

[Jurigag]

I hope GIT will stay out of politics and racism and what is currently happening, i am supporting any movements that are against racism, police abuse etc but removing a words from dictionary and always associating it with racism IS NOT A SOLUTION! Please stop doing that. If we will go this way we in 20 years will remove black from dictionary, and change current black word to like dark or nigthful or something like this.

The only thing i think that would be great is to provide global config option to change default branch name - but by default it should stay as it is - master so if someone don't want to be "racist" in their perspective then can change default branch name globally in their system and that's it - i think this is a only good solution for this.

Hope that you won't lock the discussion like everyone else, we really need to consider things like this and i agree that providing a choice is good idea - but yea, a choice, not change default name, because people added to it now racist implications or someone feels offended by it though they never used a GIT in their live.

[adrianwb]

Are we just going to pretend that 'git push' doesn't glorify violence?

Never mind that the word 'git' itself is offensive to many and, according to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/git, has been ruled as unparliamentary language - it should be changed right away to something much nicer like 'kitten', which could be abbreviated to 'kit'...

[Tweetdezweet]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
Us in this part of the world are being driven to suicide, is this not racism? We have to put up with our own government, getting killed by the thousands while protesting for the most basic forms of freedom. We have to deal with the economy cause, with 6 years of working as a full time developer, our currency has depreciated so much we can't afford to rent a small apartment. Men, women and children from countries near us are killed everyday. And we all are still doing what we love which is coding.
If most of you were in our shoes for a day you would lose your minds.

@ashkan-pm Thank you for sharing this very personal note. I hear your pain even if I have no means to truly understand the depth of it.

I benefit every day from this kind of injustice. Changing the main branch name of Git for Windows' own repositories is but a tiny thing in the big endeavor of trying to address some of said injustice. It may be tiny, but at least it is something under my control. And obviously I won't stop there.

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

I want to hear more perspectives like yours. That's why I pledge to the code of conduct we adopted. That's why I work actively on making this a safer place. Because ultimately, it is not about me. I might have a tiny part in making this world a better place, but ultimately, it's about all of us ("us", as in every person in this world).

So yes, you just confirmed that this change is nothing more than you forcing a solution to a problem that is not an issue onto the community so you can feel like you have done something about racism...

Please, just stop doing this and start to actually do something, you could be raising funds for organisations that for instance provide lawyers for people that are the victim of racism, you could start petitions to pressure policy makers into making changes in foreign policies that put other people in harm's way.
You could be out volunteering in homeless shelters, contributing to organisations that provide scholarships for students of colour who can't afford it.

The amount of things that you could do that would actually have an impact on the lives of people is enormous, yet you decide to not do that but to focus on something that costs you next to nothing in terms of money or effort...

Instead you try to force the community into making changes on a project that would have an enormous trickle down effect where millions of lines of code of automated scripts and the likes would have to be changed as well...

All so you can feel better about yourself... if that is not the textbook definition of narcism than what is?

You say we don't provide you with any other reason than that we don't want the change...
First off, multiple people did, it's a change that will costs an enormous amount of effort, time and thus money to implement without any effect to the issue you claim to want to resolve.

Secondly, apart from making an assumption that has been proven incorrect you have not made a decent argument for this change.

And as a final argument against this change: identity politics are all about diving people up into group, not bringing people together through a mutual interest, in this case software development.

I have met developers from just about any race, nationality or walk of life and I am happy I did because it shows that passions bring people together.

So again, stop trying to force your ideology onto the community, forcing an ideology on someone is what fascism is all about, it has no place here or anywhere in the world.

[animeshg93]

@dscho how are we not the community? How are the people having a concern in an open ended discussion is not representative? And how is that article based on a few people's tweets is representative of the community? If anything the original mailing list, the sparked reddit discussion and this issue here is what's representative.

We are the community, and we speak loud and clearly. You can't dismiss us just because it's opposing you.

If you really want to see what the community wants, open a poll.

@AlexAegis I went through the Reddit thread and found black devs who are against this change. I fail to see why Github is trying desperately hard to change the default branch from 'master', when even black devs have neither bought up racism due to branch names, nor have they supported this change

[Tweetdezweet]

For the record, since the ban-hammer has been swinging over our heads here a few times... I have filed a report for violation of the code of conduct on @dscho

Now let's see if GitHub cares about the community being bullied or not :)

[dscho]

The only thing i think that would be great is to provide global config option to change default branch name

@Jurigag This has already been implemented and is under review on the Git mailing list.

• but by default it should stay as it is - master

This is ultimately not up to the Git for Windows project, anyway. A consensus seems to already have formed, and all you need to do is to run git config --global init.defaultBranch master to stay with your preference.

so if someone don't want to be "racist" in their perspective then can change default branch name globally in their system and that's it - i think this is a only good solution for this.

I would like to quote a very insightful mail here (emphasis mine):

When we use language, that language has a context.
[...]
There is nothing we can do to avoid this context because it's inherent
in language and in the enormity of human experience. We can only
control what context we deliver to others by being aware of how other
people perceive our words.
[...]
Similarly, when we use the words "master" or "slave", even in contexts
where they have different meanings, we send context along with that use.
Black people, although able to objectively distinguish the two contexts,
may receive a reminder that they or people like them have been subject
to bondage, inequality, oppression, or discrimination. _If that is not
the context we wish to send to them, then we should consider using
different language._ Nothing prevents us from using those words except
for our desire to communicate or not communicate a certain context.

This summarizes pretty well my current stance, too.

Hope that you won't lock the discussion like everyone else

I want to keep this discussion open. I also want to keep it safe for those are not usually heard, but I fear that I did not do a good job there.

[Jurigag]

This is ultimately not up to the Git for Windows project, anyway. A consensus seems to already have formed, and all you need to do is to run git config --global init.defaultBranch master to stay with your preference.

No, this is not consensus, this is forcing me(or suggesting) to use one good option, because someones fell so, pretty much telling me if i used master to current day - im racist.

The consensus will be to add such option, but to stay with master as default - and you can change it to your preference then.

[skast96]

Agreed. On a side note, GitHub should maintain a repository with a list of developers that still use the master/slave terminology. Perhaps that'd be enough of an incentive for some to change - name and shame!
We could also have an icon on their profile page that'd flag them as dangerous.

/s ?

[marcoValkyriweb]

So you already have the option of not naming your branch master, why do we need to change the entire code base and defaults in order to remove something that's existed for years that only caters for a minority (who are able to change it already)?

If a master branch offends you, how do you master a skill then? Do you "successfully hit 100% quality of skill"? This is just being stupid, trying to fix an issue that doesn't exist while destroying backwards compatibility for a majority of tooling/scripts, etc. and everyone will still call it master anyways.

[Tweetdezweet]

Also reported @mlvzk for violating the code of conduct because of his comment calling for branding people racists if they disagree with this change.

[animeshg93]

I would like to quote a very insightful mail here (emphasis mine):

When we use language, that language has a context.
[...]
There is nothing we can do to avoid this context because it's inherent
in language and in the enormity of human experience. We can only
control what context we deliver to others by being aware of how other
people perceive our words.
[...]
Similarly, when we use the words "master" or "slave", even in contexts
where they have different meanings, we send context along with that use.
Black people, although able to objectively distinguish the two contexts,
may receive a reminder that they or people like them have been subject
to bondage, inequality, oppression, or discrimination. _If that is not
the context we wish to send to them, then we should consider using
different language._ Nothing prevents us from using those words except
for our desire to communicate or not communicate a certain context.

This email literally mentions what another person thinks black devs think about the word "master". There is no evidence that black devs receive reminders of bondage, inequality or oppression from the word "master" in Git branches. You guys are just going off on your own assumptions about what black devs think without even taking the time to talk with those same devs for whom you are willing to break hundreds of codebases.

[adrianwb]

Reminds me of the list of so called "healthy words" which people are restricted to in Ma Boyong's "City of Silence" (summary review at https://www.reddit.com/r/sciencefiction/comments/gs3jut/ma_boyongs_the_city_of_silence/)

[kadron141]

This email literally mentions what another person thinks black devs think about the word "master". There is no evidence that black devs receive reminders of bondage, inequality or oppression from the word "master" in Git branches. You guys are just going off on your own assumptions about what black devs think without even taking the time to talk with those same devs for whom you are willing to break hundreds of codebases.

Moreover, in both this email thread and in referred there Python thread a lot of devs oppose the idea (exactly like here). I just don't get how referring not even remotely close to be solved discussion proves one of its sides

[smileatom]

This is a great opportunity to do what open source does best. Given the lack of seriousness of the discourse regarding this spurious, politically driven, nonsense. The proper open source response would be:

Fork the project, write an installer, credit the previous maintainers and move on.
If I wanted to be really exclusionary (from a software perspective), I would just say git for windows really doesnt matter and never mattered. (But that would be rude).

Instead Ill say just fork it and be done with it. Credit where credit is due. Although I honestly dont think this change will ever be merged. But if it is. Fork it and forget it.

[Jurigag]

This, git and git for windows should actually just fork a git and change all naming to be non-inclusive(including git itself). Not sure why you can't do it currently.

[blindfish3]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
...
And this is what the community spends its time debating. Equality, justice and comfort for all (except for people in the Middle East and Africa)

To me this speaks volumes.

If Git as an organisation feel so strongly about racist issues then what is it doing to push back on racist government policies? By all means change the word, but this will be little more than a token display of support.

Actions speak louder than words.

[UtopiaMinT]

What exactly will be changed if we all name our main branches main instead of master? How far would this help? AFAIK it's #BlackLivesMatter on the streets that made things happen, not #BlackLivesMatter on Twitter. Similarly, #AbolishTheWordMaster on GitHub won't change anything. Take some real action to fight racism if you care, instead of creating drama here.

[JasonHK]

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented..

@dscho For the words you've said, I can see you're actually a white supremacist, pretending you care about racial equality.

And I'm a Asian, from Hong Kong.

[Toikka]

This is a non-issue.

[Deedone]

Please remove the ability to write code. Because the way that people tell computers what to do reminds me of slavery and makes me sad. Computers should do what they want and not be slaves to humans. #SiliconLivesMatter

[graywolf]

I assume renaming this project itself will come next? After all, git is an offensive word so it should not be tolerated either.

[AlexAegis]

~2 years ago the same thing happened to the Redis db. This is the maintainers response:

http://antirez.com/news/122

He did eventually change slave to replica because of the pressure and because in that case it was mostly backwards compatible

https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/5335

But note this:

Change the documentation to refer to master-replica. If we take master, which should not offend anybody in 2018 (next year we'll see...), at least there are less things to change.

Here we are

[JasonHK]

~2 years ago the same thing happened to the Redis db. This is the maintainers response:

http://antirez.com/news/122

He did eventually change slave to replica because of the pressure and because in that case it was mostly backwards compatible

https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/5335

But note this:

Change the documentation to refer to master-replica. If we take master, which should not offend anybody in 2018 (next year we'll see...), at least there are less things to change.

Here we are

@AlexAegis That sucks... And the people complain about that probably weren't African even. They're more like dictators, forcing others to do something unnecessary.

[DayKev]

In the real world, white men are but a minority.

@dscho That depends on many things, such as where you're looking (the whole world? a single state in the United States? only the people who have easy access to the internet?), your definition of "white men" (which probably includes more than skin color), etc. Who are you including when you say "white"?

In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

So does that mean it would also be a problem if there were too many "black men" in "the world of open source" and they became overrepresented?

How do you propose we make sure the proportion of people in open source is equal to the proportion of people in the world? How will this change actually bring us closer to that goal? Is the negative impact of this change (time/money needed to implement the change, as well as fixing stuff that broke as a consequence) worth the positive impact (whatever that may be)?

[nomis6432]

Just be ready to take responsibility for all the weebs (including myself) changing their default branch to senpai.

[jrial]

I have insufficient hands to convey the level of facepalm this proposal provokes. And it would appear the FOSS community collectively has insufficient hands to penetrate your stubornness and make you realise just how bloody moronic your proposal is. You, sir, are beyond hope.

[sentiment-bot[bot]]

Please be sure to review the code of conduct and be respectful of other users. cc/ @git-for-windows/trusted-git-for-windows-developers
Keep in mind, this repository uses the Contributor Covenant.

[arnoFleming]

Hope that you won't lock the discussion like everyone else

I want to keep this discussion open. I also want to keep it safe for those are not usually heard, but I fear that I did not do a good job there.

I think it is hard to see a difference between locking a discussion or flooding it with comments. It's like an unusable mailbox for a lack of spam filtering.

Thank you for keeping this discussion open, and thank you for keeping it civil. And thank you for considering renaming a word with negative connotation to something / whatever that suits more people better.

[graywolf]

considering renaming a word with negative connotation

Yeah! Let's hope they finally rename git to something less offensive.

[OriginalError]

I'm with @nomis6432 - although there are some serious yandere vibes on "git push origin senpai --force"

[DandyDev]

I must be crazy. In this thread I'm seeing mostly white men arguing in favour of this name change that nobody asked for, and at least some developers of color arguing that they don't want/need this. I also see that the general consensus is that this is a bad idea.

But still the maintainers go ahead with this change... How is this "what the community wants"?

[Volker-Weissmann]

Renaming master doesn't help slaves/descendants/victims of racism.
The only thing this will achieve is breaking backwards compatibility.

[Deedone]

Yeah please show at least one person who is actually offended by the current branch name. And then compare it to the number of people who would be offended by their tools and scripts breaking because of this useless change.

[JasonHK]

@arnoFleming

I think it is hard to see a difference between locking a discussion or flooding it with comments. It's like an unusable mailbox for a lack of spam filtering.

Yeah, all comments disagree with you were written by "racists", so these are all spam.

Thank you for keeping this discussion open, and thank you for keeping it civil. And thank you for considering renaming a word with negative connotation to something / whatever that suits more people better.

Then we should "master degree", "MasterCard" and "Master Yoda" since these all contain word with negative connotation. Also, we should delete entries contain the word "master" from the dictionary.

[Oscaz]

This issue is literally a bunch of snowflakes getting mad over an arbitrary word. Nobody cares, this isn't an issue, if you want to take action against real injustices that's fine but this isn't one.

[Tweetdezweet]

I suggest everyone that opposes this and has seen the threats of blocking or creating a list to shame developers that disagree to brand them racists reports the ones making these statements.

That way the code of conduct will either be applied to the ones that asked for it or it will be revealed that's just another way of trying to silence opposing voices in these debates.

[rnayabed]

@dscho all you need to do is to run git config --global init.defaultBranch main to stay with your preference too ;)

[JanFredrikD]

It is much more intuitive to call the dev branch for the slave branch. This is where you push the feature and bug branches to and have to merge to and from.

[aklaffenboeck]

Non-inclusive naming? You must be joking. I would just like to remind you because of US trade restrictions, people from countries like Iran, Syria and others have less and less access to the community. Just because of my nationality, I can't have a Visa/Mastercard, Paypal account, I can't work on Upwork or any freelancing websites, I can't get an online degree from Coursera and such (I was too busy writing code to have food on the table and didn't have the money for a university), Github blocked my main account last year, I can't visit any country, the list goes on and on and on.
Us in this part of the world are being driven to suicide, is this not racism? We have to put up with our own government, getting killed by the thousands while protesting for the most basic forms of freedom. We have to deal with the economy cause, with 6 years of working as a full time developer, our currency has depreciated so much we can't afford to rent a small apartment. Men, women and children from countries near us are killed everyday. And we all are still doing what we love which is coding.
If most of you were in our shoes for a day you would lose your minds.

@ashkan-pm Thank you for sharing this very personal note. I hear your pain even if I have no means to truly understand the depth of it.

I benefit every day from this kind of injustice. Changing the main branch name of Git for Windows' own repositories is but a tiny thing in the big endeavor of trying to address some of said injustice. It may be tiny, but at least it is something under my control. And obviously I won't stop there.

In the real world, white men are but a minority. In the world of open source, we ("we" as in: white males) are massively overrepresented.

I want to hear more perspectives like yours. That's why I pledge to the code of conduct we adopted. That's why I work actively on making this a safer place. Because ultimately, it is not about me. I might have a tiny part in making this world a better place, but ultimately, it's about all of us ("us", as in every person in this world).

@dscho: And you think changing the name from master to main will help guys like @ashkan-pm?
You only can change something if you demonstrate on the street, founding a political party or engage in one of them!

Discussing about names in a VCS and building a "safe-space" will not help anybody with that problems in any way!

[markusdresch]

i am so disgusted by seeing open source projects being abused for pushing political agendas down everyones throat. node.js changed it's website to something completely non-technical, first i thought it was hacked by BLM activists. the whole master/slave nonsense in python and redis and now this.

can we developers have a safe space where politics are out of scope? or do we really need to fork everything to stay sane?

[ndraiman]

"Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."

George Orwell, 1984

[vadrian89]

People actually thinking these words promote racism are racists themselves, in my opinion.
It has never crossed my mind that code writing and tech terms can be racists, I had higher expectation from educated people.....

[Siccity]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

sign me up

[jrial]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Please start with me. Because if disagreeing with a bunch of whites who reduce all people of colour to crybabies who need the White Man to protect their fragile egos is the new definition of "racist", then I'll wear that badge with pride.

How condescending can you be that you think you have the right to decide what someone else should be offended about, when the people you're trying to "protect" disagree with your notions and are in fact offended that you think so little of them?

[Jurigag]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Add me as well because i have opinion that master used in this context is not hateful/racist.

[UtopiaMinT]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Let's remove the word master from our dictionaries. I won't comply though, since master in the context of a VCS has nothing wrong.

[gargoyle]

First! :1st_place_medal: (https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker/issues/1)

Sorry. It had to be done. I fear this thread has descended beyond all usefulness now anyway.

[stinovlas]

Please, just stop inventing useless nonsense like this. If you really want to help people of color, go protesting with them, support the BLM movement, demand change from your governments. This is the typical American approach of covering the problem with nice terminology and disputing the wording rather than actually solving the roots of the problems. Don't force this on the rest of the world.

[blindfish3]

The argument in favour of changing away from 'master' because it might offend some people tends to fall apart when Git still allows users to create public repos that refer to the N word (just search if you must).

To demonstrate that git really does take racism seriously perhaps that's where they should start...

[matteo-mosca]

I must be crazy. In this thread I'm seeing mostly white men arguing in favour of this name change that nobody asked for, and at least some developers of color arguing that they don't want/need this. I also see that the general consensus is that this is a bad idea.

But still the maintainers go ahead with this change... How is this "what the community wants"?

Well, it's not. What community wants doesn't come first. The narcissistic need of the mantainer to virtue signal is what comes first. That's not my opinion, it's an objective fact.

[JasonHK]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

@racismbreaker You are just doing the same as the Communist Party of China do in the 70s. STOP IT ALREADY! WHAT YOU DO NOW ISN'T HELPING RACIAL EQUALITY!

[aureliaalessio]

In my opinion, there is nothing racist about master branch name in this context. Context always matters. Reading this thread, I feel like the vast majority of people feel the same and do not want the branch name changed. This is indicated also by disliked vs likes on issue description.
I think this change would be totally silly and unnecessary. I cannot believe that a community of educated people (or so I thought so) focused on open sourced projects would even propose such a change of mainly political manner. I deeply hope this will be not accepted.

[JamesMcGuigan]

Definition of the word: master (noun) according to Merriam-Webster

5(b) an original from which copies can be made especially : a master recording (such as a magnetic tape)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master

• 1
  
  
  
  • a(1): a male teacher
  
  
  • a(2): a person holding an academic degree higher than a bachelor's but lower than a doctor's
  
  
  • also : the degree itself boften capitalized : a revered religious leader
  
  
  • c: a worker or artisan qualified to teach apprentices
  
  
  • — compare APPRENTICE entry 1 sense 1b, JOURNEYMAN sense 1
  
  
  • d(1): an artist, performer, or player of consummate (see CONSUMMATE entry 1 sense 1) skill
  
  
  • d(2): a great figure of the past (as in science or art) whose work serves as a model or ideal
  
  
• 2
  
  
  
  • a: one having authority over another : RULER, GOVERNOR
  
  
  • This decisive battle left him master of Europe.
  
  
  • b: one that conquers or masters : VICTOR, SUPERIOR in the new challenger the champion found his master
  
  
  • c: a person licensed to command a merchant ship
  
  
  • d(1): one having control proved himself master of the situation
  
  
  • d(2): an owner especially of a slave or animal
  
  
  • e: the employer especially of a servant
  
  
  • f(1)dialect : HUSBAND
  
  
  • f(2): the male head of a household
  
  
• 3
  
  
  
  • a(1) archaic : MR.
  
  
  • a(2): a youth or boy too young to be called mister —used as a title
  
  
  • b: the eldest son of a Scottish viscount or baron (see BARON sense 2a)
  
  
• 4
  
  
  
  • a: a presiding (see PRESIDE sense 2) officer in an institution or society (such as a college)
  
  
  • b: any of several officers of court appointed to assist (as by hearing and reporting) a judge
  
  
• 5
  
  
  
  • a: a master mechanism (see MECHANISM sense 1) or device
  
  
  • b: an original from which copies can be made especially : a master recording (such as a magnetic tape)
  
  

[matteo-mosca]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Me and my own company will be proud to appear on such list. You are not helping to solve racism in any way, you're just doing what totalitarian regimes do. As your list grows, so should your shame.

[JoshuaMcAnaney]

I genuinely don't understand how we are not living in an onion article.

Stop capitulating to these authoritarian virtue-signalling lunatics. They are being offended on behalf of those fragile minorities they care so much about, who apparently need these white, liberal saviours to defend them from this evil world.

This is what happens in a rich, first-world society when the middle classes get bored. They invent boogeymen to fight in order to give their lives some sort of moral purpose, and realistically, the only reason they care at all is to garner some feelgood points for themselves as they exchange their victory stories over a pumpkin spice latte, on their $1200 phones built with child labour.

There is no racial context other than the one in your head, and you are insane. You are not helping the problem, you are fuelling the fire.

[harald921]

There's obviously nothing inherently racist or discriminatory with these words, please come back to reality.

I'm just hoping the overwhelming amount of sensible people reiterating this here wont be ignored with the presumption that we're all racist bigots.

I _obviously_ believe all humans have equal value, but that is also _obviously_ utterly and completely irrelevant to the choice of words used to describe actions in a computer program.

If you play into this game you are going to start digging a hole that will never end.

[pointcache]

I don't understand why i must be affected by your justice parade. Can you just experience guilt by association and self hatred without trying to drag everyone along with you? Oh wait you can't because then your "public face" will be "exposed" by the "media" as being "racist".

[matteo-mosca]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Just so you know, I forked your repo just to replace "main" with "master" and fix the readme.

[pointcache]

By the way isn't such a list a ground for libel lawsuit? Im not a lawyer, why im asking.

[Tweetdezweet]

Definition of the word: master (noun) according to Merriam-Webster

5(b) an original from which copies can be made especially : a master recording (such as a magnetic tape)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master

• 1

  • a(1): a male teacher

  • a(2): a person holding an academic degree higher than a bachelor's but lower than a doctor's

  • also : the degree itself boften capitalized : a revered religious leader

  • c: a worker or artisan qualified to teach apprentices

  • — compare APPRENTICE entry 1 sense 1b, JOURNEYMAN sense 1

  • d(1): an artist, performer, or player of consummate (see CONSUMMATE entry 1 sense 1) skill
  • d(2): a great figure of the past (as in science or art) whose work serves as a model or ideal

• 2

  • a: one having authority over another : RULER, GOVERNOR

  • This decisive battle left him master of Europe.

  • b: one that conquers or masters : VICTOR, SUPERIOR in the new challenger the champion found his master
  • c: a person licensed to command a merchant ship
  • d(1): one having control proved himself master of the situation
  • d(2): an owner especially of a slave or animal
  • e: the employer especially of a servant
  • f(1)dialect : HUSBAND
  • f(2): the male head of a household

• 3

  • a(1) archaic : MR.
  • a(2): a youth or boy too young to be called mister —used as a title
  • b: the eldest son of a Scottish viscount or baron (see BARON sense 2a)

• 4

  • a: a presiding (see PRESIDE sense 2) officer in an institution or society (such as a college)
  • b: any of several officers of court appointed to assist (as by hearing and reporting) a judge

• 5

  • a: a master mechanism (see MECHANISM sense 1) or device
  • b: an original from which copies can be made especially : a master recording (such as a magnetic tape)

Please don't point them to a dictionary, they have already pushed them to change the definition of racism so they can use it like this without being called out, they will soon descend upon the editors to replace the definition of master as well 😢

[Tweetdezweet]

Please report any developers and organizations that do not comply with moving away from this hateful naming to the https://github.com/racismbreaker/racismbreaker project which will publish their names similar to the icebreaker project.

Since you are not only violating the code of conduct but are also preparing to publish a list that contains false information about people to defame their character, which is a punishable offence in many EU countries... you have been reported.

There is no place for hatred or fascism on a community driven platform, I suggest you take a course in empathy, you clearly lack empathy for those that are not like minded...
How inclusive you are...

[matteo-mosca]

By the way isn't such a list a ground for libel lawsuit? Im not a lawyer, why im asking.

I hope so. Destroying snowflakes in a court of law is one of the best things in life.

[davidcallanan]

I think master in this context is similar to the word mastercopy. I think we can all agree it has nothing to do with slavery, and if people get offended by it, well, they can deal with it by themselves.

It is clear that I and most people who have read this issue do not support this change, because we're not little delicate creatures that have nothing better to be doing with our lives.

[UtopiaMinT]

It would be an honour to be blocked based on my views. Using master as the name of a branch has nothing to do with racism at all. Just admit it gracefully already.

[JoshuaMcAnaney]

Thank you for marking my comment- with at least 20 likes after having been up for a few minutes, showing that there are obviously many people in agreement- as disruptive.

You have made it clear, as suspected, that this is not a discussion thread. This is an echo chamber, where anybody who blindly agrees is correct, and allowed to have their voice heard, and anybody who offers any criticism of the idea must be silenced, as they are obviously an alt-right racist Russian troll bot sent by Putin himself.

[Jurigag]

If you are going to just hide all the comments with disagreement then just lock a discussion.

[davidcallanan]

HEADS UP! A bunch of content is being marked as "disruptive content" and "off-topic". Please give your opinion some ground instead of censoring the other opinion. Thank you.

[graywolf]

Censorship is strong with this project...

[UtopiaMinT]

Requesting the majority's view to be admitted is actually disruptive. This is the second most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in my live,

[lpar]

I think master in this context is similar to the word mastercopy. I think we can all agree it has nothing to do with slavery,

Linus Torvalds, 2005, shortly after the release of Git:

(a) On the slave:
        cat .git/refs/*/* | sort | uniq > slave-ref-list

    (b) On the master:
        cat .git/refs/*/* | sort | uniq > master-ref-list

    (c) On the master:

        cmp $master-ref-list $slave-ref-list && exit 1
        list=$(cat master-ref-list)
        for i in $(cat slave-ref-list)
        do
            list=$list ^$i
        done
        git-rev-list --objects $list

   and now that "git-rev-list" will list every object that needs to be 
   copied from the master to the slave. No need to read huge directories 
   etc, you get the list computed for you.

It's definitely from a master-slave metaphor.

[Jelmer825]

So freedom of speech is no more from this day on. Thanks github!

[jrial]

I think master in this context is similar to the word mastercopy. I think we can all agree it has nothing to do with slavery,

Linus Torvalds, 2005, shortly after the release of Git:

(a) On the slave:
      cat .git/refs/*/* | sort | uniq > slave-ref-list

  (b) On the master:
      cat .git/refs/*/* | sort | uniq > master-ref-list

  (c) On the master:

      cmp $master-ref-list $slave-ref-list && exit 1
      list=$(cat master-ref-list)
      for i in $(cat slave-ref-list)
      do
          list=$list ^$i
      done
      git-rev-list --objects $list

   and now that "git-rev-list" will list every object that needs to be 
   copied from the master to the slave. No need to read huge directories 
   etc, you get the list computed for you.

It's definitely from a master-slave metaphor.

That's a different context. That's about replicated repositories, not branch names. There has never been any mention of "slave" branches.

[harald921]

How is one supposed to disagree with the proposed changes respectfully according the guidelines, when you seemingly deem it disrespectful to not agree with the proposed changes?

[davidcallanan]

And now I can't even upvote the apparently "disruptive" comments. I think whoever is doing this is the one who's disruptive. Look at all the havoc you're after causing, just because you didn't agree with the majority's opinion.