loading...

re: Replacing master in git VIEW POST

TOP OF THREAD FULL DISCUSSION
re: So did you even read my last reply? Anyway, name your branches whatever you want. I'm not sure why people are pushing back on this so hard. It's no...

Sure I did.
Let me put it in other words: there is no slave in git, 'master' in git not originating from an offensive "master/slave wording". It is just a single word same as in master's degree, mastercard, etc.
Something originating from 'master copy'.

Github competitor, Gitlab, was first to enrol into this renaming stuff. They've decided to change white-list and black-list terms. Well, ok, this could sound offensive.
Github had to act too.

I'm pushing on this, cause I see just politics here. this change will not improve anyone's life. There are other better things to worry about.

Reading this post I got really curious to find more about if the word master in git had relation with the master/slave terminology in tech. If you go to github.com/git/git, clone it and run git log -p --grep=slave, you'll see it does.

So yes, there is slave in git and it comes from master/slave wording. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Ok, you rename that poor master branch
But what you gonna do with this?
github.com/search?q=slave

I'll do nothing at all. I just argued against your paragraph where you strongly said that the term's origin wasn't related to something, but it is, without providing sources. Which words people choose to have in their repositories/codebase is something that might reflect on their careers not mine. So, ask them.

Some comments have been hidden by the post's author - find out more

code of conduct - report abuse