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

Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

lore.kernel.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 271 posts

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#181

Post by bit-rot »

sorokod wrote: post #161
bit-rot wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny to me about your comment is that you actually chose a perfect example of the importance of critical thinking in how we discuss terminology. The message behind the English idiom you chose is clearly one of self empowerment; /you/ are the master of /your own/ destiny implies independence, freedom, and agency. In the context of git, and distributed systems more broadly, `master` is specifically chosen for i…

Do you care that in this context the meaning of master is "an original from which copies can be made" or is it irrelevant as you want to have bit of rightous rage?

Consider re-reading what I wrote. "master" has many meanings, and the whole point I'm making is that context is key. I am not sure what you're referring to with "righteous rage".

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#182

Post by bit-rot »

sorokod wrote: post #167
shishy wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He said: > Whether this is intentionally "bad" holds no meaning whatsoever. His emphasis is on empathy for the people who are affected by the usage of certain terminology. If it's a trivial change we can make to accommodate them, why shouldn't we?

Because a line should be drawn somewhere. You use he in "He said", should you not be more careful about your gender assumptions? Are you sure they won't take offense?

I don't take offense, but thanks for your genuine concern.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#183

Post by floatingatoll »

csense wrote: post #172
wadkar wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am happy to see this. You say bullied into compliance but all I see is a community consciously putting efforts to become more inclusive. It may not be that big of a deal for you but it is a big deal for those who don’t share the same worldview as you. Are your principals so low that you wouldn’t accommodate change of language and behavior to be more welcoming of others? What do you think about people who curse like…

> Are your principals so low that you wouldn’t accommodate change of language and behavior to be more welcoming of others? I'm saying that if someone finds the word "master" offensive in this context, they want to be offended. If someone wants to be offended, they will find something that offends them. Nothing you do will ever make such people stop being offended. Next they'll be insisting that "bit" and "binary" nee…

> I'm saying that if someone finds the word "master" offensive in this context, they want to be offended.

Inverting this, it reads as:

> No one could possibly be genuinely offended by the word "master" in this context.

You are incorrect. Many are genuinely offended. Some of them are commenting here on HN.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#184

Post by GhostVII »

aaomidi wrote: post #132
GhostVII wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We haven't lost anything, but we've gained the expectation that we should be accommodating a tiny minority of people being offended for no reason. Sure it's not much work to switch "master" to "main" (although in aggregate it's probably a tonne of person hours), but what happens when the next trend is to be offended at "blacklist", or "sanity check", or any of the other thousands of words that someone is inevitably g…

You're pushing all the "angry minority" stereotype in your language in your comment. Like, if I as a brown person am uncomfortable something it's me being an irrationally offended minority. If it's a white person it's just Mike having a bad day. I'm glad you're not my coworker.

When I say "irrationally offended minority", I mean "minority" as in a small number of people, not "minority" as in racial minority, although I see why they isn't clear given that I use the word in two different ways in my comment. Most of the people I've seen get offended for trivial reasons are actually not a racial minority at all.

As I said, if a significant number of people are offended (or if a small number are offended for a good reason), we should probably change our language. But if it is a small number of people getting offended at a word used in a context where it has never been offensive, I don't think we should accomodate them.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#185

Post by umvi »

tw4l wrote: post #176
umvi wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think people who are outside of these underrepresented groups understand just how many small reminders a day we get that the "default" is for us not to be welcome. IMHO (and I didn't downvote you, btw), I believe you (and other minorities) are choosing to interpret things like complaining about political changes to code and projects as persecution. That is a choice you are making. You could also choose to s…

I appreciate you taking the time to share your perspective. I think where we disagree is in characterizing making inclusive language changes as "political" and keeping the status quo as "non-political", when the status quo is demonstrably not working for a lot of people. Changing "master" to "main" is admittedly likely near the end of the list of what the tech industry needs to do to in that regard, but if we can't e…

> I think where we disagree is in characterizing making inclusive language changes as "political" and keeping the status quo as "non-political", when the status quo is demonstrably not working for a lot of people

Sure, your perspective is valid too, I just tend to lean the other way. I tend to believe that it is impossible to please everyone and that we should not strive to unless it has clear, demonstrable value.

> we can't even get low-effort token gestures like that to happen without a lot of outcry I'm not optimistic about any kind of substantive change.

Well, I think part of the reason for outcry in this particular case is that it is (again, IMHO) not a "low-effort token gesture". I mean, if you look at the patch being submitted in the email linked at the top of the thread to make main the new default:

> 351 files changed, 3903 insertions(+), 3890 deletions(-)

and for me personally it means that all my future git repos are going to have a different default branch than my past repos which breaks some of my utility scripts. And if I configure the default branch of my future repos to remain "master" to avoid this then some people might take offense and see it as a dogwhistle.

So to me this whole thing seems like a big charade, but maybe the silver lining is that Git really should have been designed from the start to easily take arbitrary default branch names, and this patch will enable that.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#186

Post by sharken »

tachyonbeam wrote: post #3

If I say "you are the master of your own destiny", is that offensive, because the word "master" is always offensive? I think that "main branch" sounds fine, it makes as much sense as "master branch", but I'm irked that people are always caving to word policing. Like, we're just going to scratch a whole bunch of words from the dictionary because someone somewhere is offended? The other day, people at my workplace were…

Sometimes I tend to divide the world into developers and non-developers. It is just another way of saying those who gets things done and those who don’t.

People who take offense with these minor issues are very likely those who don’t get things done.

Not sure what to do about it except fight it every step of the way.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#187

Post by TechBro8615 »

When will they change the name of the software itself? I’m pretty sure “git” is a more offensive term than “master,” as it means an “unpleasant or contemptible person.” The point of the word is to use it when intending to be offensive.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#188

Post by codereflection »

bit-rot wrote: post #126
tachyonbeam wrote: post #3

If I say "you are the master of your own destiny", is that offensive, because the word "master" is always offensive? I think that "main branch" sounds fine, it makes as much sense as "master branch", but I'm irked that people are always caving to word policing. Like, we're just going to scratch a whole bunch of words from the dictionary because someone somewhere is offended? The other day, people at my workplace were…

What's funny to me about your comment is that you actually chose a perfect example of the importance of critical thinking in how we discuss terminology. The message behind the English idiom you chose is clearly one of self empowerment; /you/ are the master of /your own/ destiny implies independence, freedom, and agency. In the context of git, and distributed systems more broadly, `master` is specifically chosen for i…

Well said. We lack as a society in holding some degree of empathy for people who are affected differently by situations, experiences, historical context than us.

Re: Update to Git changes the default of init.defaultBranch to main

#190

Post by warmwaffles »

edejong wrote: post #156
tdy_err wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the same but when I looked it up out of curiosity I was surprised to see the primary (probably most established) definition of master is ~ “one who owns people”.

Oh really, where did you look it up? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master

Pack it up, we need to rename the Masters degree to something else. Heh.
Post reply on HN