Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#31

Post by gimboland »

Jetroid wrote: post #22

Whilst in theory, I'm neutral to the change on ethical grounds, I think in practice it will make things very confusing. Master/Slave is such an established pair of terms in tech that they have a loaded meaning as soon as you see them. If I see 'Master' and 'Slave' on an old hard disk, I know what that is. If I see "Configure one device to the master setting and the rest to slave.", I get a understanding of the relati…

Right. And the fact that you don't find those terms offensive is part of your privilege. You're being invited to step outside of yourself and consider that for some people, it's not as clear-cut / apolitical as it is for you.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#32

Post by hckr_news »

jayd16 wrote: post #9

But its not master as in master/slave (which I assume is the concern?) There is no slave branch. Its master like main or premier. Like a master bedroom.

> Like a master bedroom

About that..

https://www.shoutoutuk.org/2020/01/16/master-bedroom-an-anti...

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#33

Post by derision »

gimboland wrote: post #31
Jetroid wrote: post #22

Whilst in theory, I'm neutral to the change on ethical grounds, I think in practice it will make things very confusing. Master/Slave is such an established pair of terms in tech that they have a loaded meaning as soon as you see them. If I see 'Master' and 'Slave' on an old hard disk, I know what that is. If I see "Configure one device to the master setting and the rest to slave.", I get a understanding of the relati…

Right. And the fact that you don't find those terms offensive is part of your privilege. You're being invited to step outside of yourself and consider that for some people, it's not as clear-cut / apolitical as it is for you.

Every non-white person I've seen commenting on this change has expressed they couldn't care less and do not give a second thought to these naming conventions. Maybe we should let their voices be heard rather than continue to try to speak for them?

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#34

Post by zzo38computer »

derision wrote: post #33
gimboland wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. And the fact that you don't find those terms offensive is part of your privilege. You're being invited to step outside of yourself and consider that for some people, it's not as clear-cut / apolitical as it is for you.

Every non-white person I've seen commenting on this change has expressed they couldn't care less and do not give a second thought to these naming conventions. Maybe we should let their voices be heard rather than continue to try to speak for them?

I think that is a valid point. While I have not asked people about this myself, the article on All The Tropes wiki about "Political Correctness Gone Mad" has examples of people trying to change things to avoid offending people, resulting in the people they are trying to avoid offending complaining about it.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#35

Post by smitty1e »

Etheryte wrote: post #14

That's over a 100 comments, many of them very calm and neutral, marked off-topic, over 10 people blocked, and then the whole discussion locked. I get that this is can be a heated discussion, but honestly most (although surely, not all) of those comments are about as neutral as it gets on this matter.

It's almost as though there were a prevailing orthodoxy, and dissent is so much CVS code.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#36

Post by smitty1e »

executive wrote: post #21
codegladiator wrote: post #10

> I had actually started with "default", and was told it might be triggering for folks in financial trouble? So now 'default' is out too ? This is absurd.

Trunk is out too, since people hunt elephants.

We need to reconsider using the Roman alphabet and English language at all, if Progress is to be achieved.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#38

Post by karmakaze »

jayd16 wrote: post #24
gimboland wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure about that? I've seen a number of reports over the last few days that "master" in git is basically a holdover from BitKeeper which had master/slave repositories (and that in BitKeeper you use repos to "do" branching). I haven't looked into this in enough depth to convince myself either way, but I would do so before echoing your first sentence. Certainly a _lot_ of people are assuming it means "master cop…

You're right that I do not know the history. It might not be historically true but I would argue that's irrelevant to the conversation. (even as non relevant the conversation is to begin with!) Current perception is what matters. Beyond that, seems like if it actually did refer to a master/slave architecture, it seems like there would be more reason to keep it describing what it is. Maybe the term invokes some violen…

I used to use 'master' and 'read-slave' database nodes. I'm happier with 'writer' and 'read-replica'. I would say this is definitely in context.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#39

Post by sebazzz »

derision wrote: post #33
gimboland wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. And the fact that you don't find those terms offensive is part of your privilege. You're being invited to step outside of yourself and consider that for some people, it's not as clear-cut / apolitical as it is for you.

Every non-white person I've seen commenting on this change has expressed they couldn't care less and do not give a second thought to these naming conventions. Maybe we should let their voices be heard rather than continue to try to speak for them?

It is the few that speak the loudest and will _never_ be happy, no matter what. There will always be something that needs to be changed.

Re: Discussion on renaming master branch gets heated, then shut down

#40

Post by zzo38computer »

I think that there is no need to change these things. If you make a new version control system, then you can use whichever name you think is best (presumably whichever one is most descriptive, but not too long), but we need not change existing ones, nor change projects using them to use different names.

I personally don't use git, but the naming of the default branch has nothing to do with it. I use Fossil, which uses "trunk" as the name for the default branch. I don't know what reason they chose this, but I don't really care much; I just use that because it is the software I use (even if some people hate it, which I suppose is inevitable).

I also think that other terminology such as blacklist/whitelist, master/slave, etc need not be changed, unless the old terms are confusing or incorrect, which in some contexts there is the possibility that they might be. In some cases, such as motherboard vs mainboard, BC/AD vs BCE/CE, both sets of terms are in use so it is helpful to know them.

Political correctness has gone mad (although this is nothing new, really).

Post reply on HN