How’s it going, I'm a Adam, a Full-Stack Engineer, actively searching for work. I'm all about JavaScript. And Frontend but don't let that fool you - I've also got some serious Backend skills.
Location
City of Bath, UK 🇬🇧
Education
10 plus years* active enterprise development experience and a Fine art degree 🎨
I didn't ever want to be racist, it's just a word that lets me checkout some code ðŸ˜, I live in Bristol UK where we pull down statues of slave traders, BLM support here is strong, it's making me reevaluate a few things. Maybe master is derived from slavery after all?
You are overthinking it. I also think this has been blown way out of proportions really.
I don't think I've ever read anywhere online (before this became big news this year) that people were considering master as a insulting term for a branch name when using version control.
I know it's easy to change the master branch name in a git repository, but this whole thing feels like "solving" a problem that doesn't really exist.
Unfortunately for someone that might start learning git, this whole "dropping master" thing will could make it super confusing based on all existing tutorials and learning material.
Our default branch is "development" and because we can have different versions in different environments, we've never used the "master" branch.
Branches don't have subordinates so the race debate isn't really appropriate here. All branches end up in the "Dev" branch after MR, so they're all equal.
That we can now configure the default, just means I don't have to delete a local branch when starting a new project. Whoopie. I'll probably forget & try anyway the first 20 or so times.
I didn't ever want to be racist, it's just a word that lets me checkout some code ðŸ˜, I live in Bristol UK where we pull down statues of slave traders, BLM support here is strong, it's making me reevaluate a few things. Maybe master is derived from slavery after all?
Don't worry, your choice of branch name doesn't make you racist. It's about how you treat others. Don't overthink it.
You are overthinking it. I also think this has been blown way out of proportions really.
I don't think I've ever read anywhere online (before this became big news this year) that people were considering
masteras a insulting term for a branch name when using version control.I know it's easy to change the master branch name in a git repository, but this whole thing feels like "solving" a problem that doesn't really exist.
Unfortunately for someone that might start learning git, this whole "dropping master" thing will could make it super confusing based on all existing tutorials and learning material.
I'm with you.
Our default branch is "development" and because we can have different versions in different environments, we've never used the "master" branch.
Branches don't have subordinates so the race debate isn't really appropriate here. All branches end up in the "Dev" branch after MR, so they're all equal.
That we can now configure the default, just means I don't have to delete a local branch when starting a new project. Whoopie. I'll probably forget & try anyway the first 20 or so times.
The original intention of the term in the context of git is as in "master record".