Has Github/Microsoft rolled back the master to main switch?

[raldone01@lemmy.world]

I don't think that's a good idea it's not descriptive enough in my opinion.

[kreynen@kbin.melroy.org]

@[email protected]

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

The posts you are replying to ha e been deleted. I'm really currious what they said because we have one vendor who claims to be/is locked into usung "master". This either requires us to write CI that merges main -> master and mirrors master back to main or use master. This can confuse junior devs once or twice, but it is really not an issue. The ONLY time I felt compelled to use master because of this vendor was when working with a group using GitLab. GitLab has a feature called Pull Mirroring that is MUCH more reliable than a pull/mirror action in GitHub that does the same thing, but to use that the branch names had to be the same.

I see both sides of this argument. The master/slave relationship in tech is NOT like masterworks or mastering a craft. It is based on one "owning" the other, but I don't think that allowing technology to work that way is violating its rights. Obviously changing the name doesn't change the behavior and isn't it really only when that behavior is applied to people that we have a problem with it?

I never fully supported the effort required to change, but I've also never written anything in a way it would be difficult to change. I recognize that it could be considered a micro aggression, but it's not like we are going to stop ants or bees from treating other classes as forced labor. Slavery exists. It is bad when applied to people. It accurately describes tech. Changing the name of the master db or branch did NOT free the slaves.

[heavydust@sh.itjust.works]

I demand trunk because https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/ is a great branching strategy guide that anyone should read. It also explains how to release code or fix it in a good way.

[wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

It defaults to master if your account existed before the change I believe.

At least I had to manually change it.

[clif@lemmy.world]

I'll find something else to screw up and cause it to break, don't worry.

[poollovernathan@programming.dev]

My main branch is called HEAD.

[elephantium@lemmy.world]

master/slave relationship in tech

Wait, this is a thread about branch names in git. The "master" in question would be more akin to a "master recording" from music, not master/slave software or system architecture.

[boatswain@infosec.pub]

That you'd be a bad teammate: the kind of person who puts personal preference above what the group has decided and causes problems for no good reason; the kind of person who would insist on indenting with spaces when the whole team has decided to use tabs.

[phoenixz@lemmy.ca]

I honestly never saw a problem with master / slave, nor with whitelist / blacklist. It's the same as killing children, forking children, etc, it's computer terminology and not everything means that bad thing that you personally want it to mean.

I'm not politically correct, I live in a real world. Calling a git repository different really isn't doing shit against slavery and it pisses me off that people are going to down vote me on their slavery built iPhone because apparently I like naughty words and you apparently like slavery.

You want to stop racism? Then stop meddling with computer terminology and go out there and actually do something real.

[sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works]

You monster.

[sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works]

I like develop. Sounds nice and indicates things may be unstable.

[astrsk@fedia.io]

While it may be true that the master branch is more akin to a master record, not everyone knows the nuance and quite frankly it doesn’t matter, if it makes people uncomfortable then it shouldn’t be a problem to accommodate a simple change, most of the tech world has already done so. Computers used to have a literal slave/master relationship with hardware components and control systems and we moved past that just fine despite still having controllers and actors everywhere.

[gerryflap@feddit.nl]

Honestly I feel like people who had an issue with this were just as much making an issue out of nothing. I personally also think that "master" is just as much a normal and valid name as "main", and to me the rename kinda felt like performative bullshit. But at the same time it's just a name, if it makes people happy I don't really care either. Nowadays I tend to use main, but it's not something I really pay attention to.

[mubelotix@jlai.lu]

Do you speak french too? I'm french myself and we use master for so many normal things. Americans don't get that word right because their langage lost many of its meanings. It's funny to see people get offended just because they misunderstand the etymology of a word

[elephantium@lemmy.world]

quite frankly it doesn’t matter

In that case, the name of the branch shouldn't matter. Why are you arguing so hard that it does?

Computers used to have a literal slave/master relationship with hardware components and control systems

OK, this part is just utter nonsense.

[verticagg@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

nailed it lmao

[verticagg@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

L+Ratio+"I know what I'm saying makes you uncomfortable and wields power over you, and you should let me wield that power over you"

[surewhynotlem@lemmy.world]

I appreciate your intense emotion about the topic of changing terminology. It's hard to wrangle in our feelings when things change.

I completely agree with your last statement. What have you done to accomplish that?