12 comments

[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 34.9 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
I think Matz' approach is reasonable here, as opposed to most I've read about.
His response is the most reasonable one that I have seen through all of these, non-issue issues that have come up over this idea that master branch is actually referring to slavery. Id really wonder who even thought that master in the context of git was ever a reference to slavery. I have to think they were some high school/college student that some how made the connection while watching history channel late at night after enjoying a Friday evening or something.
I think it's pretty obvious that master gets its taint from the common master-slave usage.

That usage should be changed to leader/follower most likely.

I haven't renamed my default branches, myself, because "master" alone does not imply master/slave.

It would have been interesting to do a wide spread survey for that prior to all this going down. I believe that it would have been an incredibly small number of people that would believe or make that connection.
I would suggest 'liege' and 'vassal' although the 'm-word' and the 's-word' might be an alternative.
I actually kind of like 'liege' and 'vassal': if we really need to replace the current terminology, I'd definitely be open to 'liege'/'vassal'.

I'm going to assume you were joking about 'm-word' and 's-word', because there is no world in which I can imagine people having technical discussions while saying that...

We should use some ridiculously comical terminology like Starfleet Captain and Redshirt.
I don't like everything becoming so Americanised.
Slavery is not a purely American institution.
Connecting it with skin colours, which is what this whole nonsense is about, is.
Are we even allowed to care about "master" and "slave"? I think it's cultural appropriation.