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

Gitlab default branch name changes to main

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 294 posts

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#91

Post by truculent »

vshager wrote: post #74
truculent wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not examining every word. This article is about examining a specific word, with a specific history, within a specific context.

In a specific country, whose industry takes free open source labor from all over the world and then imposes its own cultural values. Open source people from other regions provide the majority of code and have no say in political decisions. One might be tempted to say that they are slaves.

> imposes its own cultural values.

This is a default. If it offends your sensibilities so much, you can configure it to be something else.

Heck, I'd even go as far as suggesting that "main" is a more common word for non-native speakers of english than "master", making it more intuitive for non-US developers.

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#93

Post by kbd »

rualca wrote: post #77
kbd wrote: post #29

The most unfortunate part of all this churn is that git didn’t provide a way to ask it what a repository’s main branch is named.

This is not unfortunate at all. This is something that only has an impact when you create a brand new git repo,which is relatively rare. When that happened, you could just rename the original master branch. Nevertheless, git added support for this option less than a year ago. https://github.blog/2020-07-27-highlights-from-git-2-28/#int...

> This is something that only has an impact when you create a brand new git repo,which is relatively rare.

What a strange thing to claim, when both this thread and the original post talk about things that need to update based on the change, such as CI/CD scripts, git aliases, and so on.

> Nevertheless, git added support for this option less than a year ago.

Yes, I'm just saying it's strange that git added support to customize the name, but then didn't add a way to ask it what it's configured to, given that things will depend on knowing what that name is.

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#94

Post by oap_bram »

mswtk wrote: post #78
oap_bram wrote: post #16

I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for som…

> I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for s…

I don't know, I can't speak for the people who's access is limited. However, I am Dutch and can say that these cultural sensibilities are far outside of just the "American" one.

There are plenty of people that struggle with this terminology in a realistic way. Even if you can't find anecdotal evidence of someone being offended by this, you can rationally come to the conclusion that it might be worth changing it. And for it to be accessible, it doesn't need to come 100% from the people that face problems with the terminology. If it were to be 100% those people, than it would be a great from of cultural emancipation however!

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#95

Post by furgooswft13 »

Smaug123 wrote: post #73
narven wrote: post #63

When I think that people are not that stupid, there's always someone that surprises me. What on earth has the name "master" to do with anything? Why dont we remove the word "master" from all languages in the world and make it a tabu to even speak of it. What does master/slave in relation to "hu-mans" has to do with anything else in the world that has the same name? Just the amount of money and work hours done by ever…

Please don't be hysterical. In case you're getting angry at the downvotes, I can tell you why you're getting them. There are only two lines of content in your comment other than tribal affiliation signal. One of them is a factually obviously false statement ("Just the amount of money and work hours done… to make this… change… could feed all the starving people on the world"); one of them is a question answered in the…

> One of them is a factually obviously false statement ("Just the amount of money and work hours done… to make this… change… could feed all the starving people on the world")

Hyperbole for this one thing to be sure, but the amount of money _and_ time spent in total on the Social Justice Industrial Complex over the past few years could probably have terraformed Mars. What a waste.

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#96

Post by egwor »

oap_bram wrote: post #61
kyrieeschaton wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who believes that "master" is some kind of slur and takes the opportunity to take offense over it is not someone you want causing problems in your organization.

I dont know, I was taught from a very young age to be nice. And honestly, I kinda of kept it as a close part of my personality to not make anyone feel uncomfortable for any reason. Although I can argue most of these things from a political angle, I also feel like "making people feel more welcome" is a goal in and of itself, and therefor can't be overlooked. Honestly, I feel like if you would have a problem with a par…

Totally agree with this.

If someone still struggles to get behind it, think of the few chars that will be shorter to type and also think how it is much easier to compare the branch concept a real tree, and talk about the main branch. Maybe they could have gone for trunk? (If you care so much about main vs trunk, then choose whatever makes you happy)

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#97

Post by thinkingemote »

chrisweekly wrote: post #88
gear54rus wrote: post #2

Another victim of this hysteria. Will surely make a point to switch it back every time I create a repo.

Adoption of more inclusive terms is hardly "hysteria". This IETF memo^1 makes a rational, compelling case for adopting alternate terms. I encourage you to read it, and try taking a broader, more empathetic view. Pause to consider the weight and connotations of certain words for certain groups of people, before claiming victimhood or accusing others of hysteria. Characterizing the change as "PC Politburo" word-policin…

Part of taking a broad and empathetic approach is understanding all people's emotions, thoughts and desires without necessarily sympathetiszing with them. Empathy is a pre requisite for agreement, discussion and conflict resolution.

What these types of changes show, however is that there is no discussion and the opposition to such change indicates a "lack of empathy" which is a classic othering tactic. That to me is worrying. People should be able to meet in the middle, to negotiate change.

These types of change appear to have been done with no real agreement, no meeting in the middle. It appears as if, ironically (and with a bit of exaggeration from me), no empathy outside of the ingroup was used.

The reality is no holistic understanding or discussion is required as it's a foregone decision and one where almost everyone in this discussion forum has no say about. We should just get on and live with it.

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#98

Post by [deleted] »

hYKdTfpa wrote: post #40
bovermyer wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether it's called "master" or "main" affects me very little. Whether it's called "master" or "main" affects some people very much. I'm enough of a team player that I'm willing to make the switch to make others more comfortable.

No, it doesn't affect anyone. It's a perfectly legitimate use of the word.

[deleted]

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#99

Post by egwor »

truculent wrote: post #28

Either (1) Default name doesn't have inherent value; therefore, changing the default isn't a big deal (low downside), even if the upside is low (2) "master" is for some reason a better name than "main" I never see the people complaining about this stuff spelling out a reason why it's a bad idea to change (2), and am forced to conclude that we are in scenario (1). It seems to me that opinion is much more divided on th…

We have auto merges setup vs master within bitbucket. I've asked our support team to raise it with them and get it addressed. Thats the only reason we've not changed it. We don't develop off master anymore anyway, so it is a bit of a moot point from anyone using the repo. The main annoyance is that when you clone a repo it always comes from master so you have to tell people.

Re: Gitlab default branch name changes to main

#100

Post by salmo »

temporama1 wrote: post #34
oap_bram wrote: post #16

I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. If people want to be part of our community of developers I think it's great that these organizations listen to people who might have a problem with certain terminology. Even though I don't have a problem with those terms, I think it's still worth evaluating if they're worth keeping if it makes it harder for som…

The number of people that _genuinely_ have a problem with the word "master" (excluding all the weird (white) twitter people) is close to zero.

In most places this is true. But working in Plantation heavy part of the South, it’s awkward.

Read it in a Southern white male accent to someone whose grandparents were sharecroppers in the Delta. We lose a lot of black talent to other industries, non technical roles in IT, and other locations despite good pay/cost of living.

My black friend from high school on my team who is not overly sensitive and I have open conversations on race with has says it occasionally makes him cringe. I try to maintain an environment that’s sensitive to people’s real feelings, because I want them all to enjoy work. Not PC BS, but thinking about who needs to be asked to speak up, who needs more quiet time, etc.

Probably hearing it in a different accent would make it more divorced from the past.

This alone obviously won’t fix anything. But it’s one less thing to make people feel uncomfortable, and it doesn’t cost anything except a naming convention.

People talk about diversity as if it’s just helping minorities. But working with low and high functioning teams over the years, my experience is that a happy diverse team is productive and creates a better product. I think including more perspectives in a job that is creative creates better results earlier in the process.

Post reply on HN