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

GitHub, fuck your name change

mooseyanon.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#611

Post by calibas »

With computers there is often a master/slave relationship, there is one system that's in near absolute control of another. It's practical and there's no ethical issues, the slave computer doesn't feel anything. Of course, with human beings it's a completely different story, but we're talking about computers.

As far as human beings, the problem was (and is) slavery, it's not the word "master". Especially in the US, there's this idea that we just have to change the terminology around, ban a word, and suddenly racism will disappear. Both political parties, the mainstream media, and major corporations all love this, because they get to make superficial changes and then sweep racism under the rug.

Now if GitHub wanted to do something truly radical to fight racism, they'd change the name of the "master" branch to the "black" branch. I understand most people will be resistant to this, simply because "black" has a negative connotation, but please be aware of your own personal reactions to the word, as that's my whole point. The word "black" also means darkness, evil, it's something dirty, while "white" means purity, goodness, and cleanliness. And I'm just pointing out the what's already in people's minds, don't shoot the messenger!

If something is "black and white", there's a clear right and wrong. In our language, "black" is synonymous with "wrong", and yet this word with negative connotations is used for an entire race of people.

Instead of practicing censorship, which is reprehensible in a free society, and reminiscent of the same kind of authoritarianism that produces master/slave relationships among human beings, why not do something actually progressive? Have we forgotten what that looks like? Challenge society's entire perception of the word "black", rename the "master" branch "black", and begin to associate the word with something good for once. Start by changing the way people think. Turn black into something positive, and if you really want to see people's racism come out, use white in a negative sense.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#612

Post by geekraver »

jssmith wrote: post #538

I want to share my own reactions to the name change since this is a really interesting topic. For context, I'm an African American, so many of my ancestors were slaves. - The first time it occurred to me that "master" in this context could offend anyone was when GitHub changed the name (and broke my workflow). - My immediate reaction was, "this change is by white people for white people," where "white" means anyone w…

While there may be plenty of people of all races who were not offended by the name, when you operate at the scale of a GitHub there is going to be some percentage who are. Some of them will complain. A company like GitHub then has two main options: change the name, or defend not changing the name. Whichever one they pick is going to cause various forms of backlash from various people, but it’s pretty obvious that changing the name is more defensible and the better long-term approach.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#613

Post by ayo4yayo »

KaiserPro wrote: post #175

Now I know this post is going to be jumped on by a whole bunch of tech bro going "I TOLD YOU, ITS POINTLESS TO CHANGE THE NAME" and yes, yes it is, for the reasons described so clearly by OP. However what the tech bros then get upset by is increasing participation in IT in general. muttering things like "lowering standards" and "they'll get promotion before me". No darlings, they are doing a better job, because they…

Have anything relevant to share?

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#614

Post by NwtnsMthd »

jssmith wrote: post #538

I want to share my own reactions to the name change since this is a really interesting topic. For context, I'm an African American, so many of my ancestors were slaves. - The first time it occurred to me that "master" in this context could offend anyone was when GitHub changed the name (and broke my workflow). - My immediate reaction was, "this change is by white people for white people," where "white" means anyone w…

Hm, never thought of it like that.

I was caught off guard by the change when it was implemented, and was frankly quite annoyed. My suspicions were the same as the author's, that the reasons were likely insincere. But I never made the leap you did to (try and) assess my subconscious biases. Thank you for the insight!

On an other note, 'main' is fewer letters to capture the same idea ad therefore more efficient.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#615

Post by varispeed »

optimiz3 wrote: post #608

When Darth Vader tells Luke that one day Luke will call him master, is he also committing a microagression? Maybe the writers were, but I doubt it. To most English speakers master just means person in control or source of truth. Or we should retcon Star Wars. Time to ban some more books and film I guess. Yay?

It can also be used in context of mastering a skill or in the audio world the final copy of a song is called a master. Now what?

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#617

Post by ayo4yayo »

PretzelPirate wrote: post #485
timvisee wrote: post #445

> Either do some real shit or stay silent. Stay the fuck out of our way and don’t pretend you care. Then we can all get on with our lives. Yes! Also, I think that if you see 'master' for a git branch as a problem, there is something seriously wrong with you.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft. I’ve seen many Microsoft employees internally comment on how they don’t like the term “master branch”. I believe Microsoft’s renaming (this is my personal belief) was somewhat influenced by that internal push. It may not mean much to you, but if it made some people feel more comfortable it’s a good change and has very few downsides.

I don’t like having meetings after lunch. Should the entire world change to suit my preferences?

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#618

Post by dleslie »

ratamattat wrote: post #547
jssmith wrote: post #538

I want to share my own reactions to the name change since this is a really interesting topic. For context, I'm an African American, so many of my ancestors were slaves. - The first time it occurred to me that "master" in this context could offend anyone was when GitHub changed the name (and broke my workflow). - My immediate reaction was, "this change is by white people for white people," where "white" means anyone w…

How exactly did it break your workflow? The change only affects new repositories and doesn't prevent you from creating a master branch on those new repositories. You're even able to set any branch name as default on a user, org, or enterprise level.

I had a bunch of scripts that would automatically clone repos and ensure that they were pointing at the correct branch; they started breaking when the branch names started changing.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#619

Post by oaiey »

aaronbasssett wrote: post #606

Please name one country that never had slavery?

Never is a hard word. Let me explain: In the US the white were masters and the black were slaves. A white was rarely a slave, a black person was likely a slave. And slavery was not abolished that long ago.

In MANY countries people of color X enslaved people of color X. So now - many generations later - no one knows anymore who was slave and who was master. So the term master is insignificant for the individuals in the country and dominantly associated with mastery in something.

So while technically the statement is correct, for the discussion here, many countries are not having an active discussion around slavery because it is no concern in the society because there are not slave-descendants (which are mistreated until today) vs. master-descendants.

Post reply on HN