81–90 of 294 posts
I work in a fairly small company, but if i think of all the things we'd have to change in our infrastructure to exclude all of those offending words (like Black- and White-Lists), we'd probably be busy for a couple of weeks.
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…
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…
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.
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…
There is a downside which is all aliases and snippets which assume `master` and no longer work (or work across repositories).
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…
There is a downside which is all aliases and snippets which assume `master` and no longer work (or work across repositories).
Another victim of this hysteria. Will surely make a point to switch it back every time I create a repo.
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-policing strikes me as a shallow, knee-jerk response to a positive change. Fewer characters, less baggage, clearer semantics. What's the harm?
1. https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-04.html
I think the default branch name change has been good for the ecosystem; “master” didn’t always make sense for whatever workflow was used, and it was hardcoded all over a bunch of tooling. I think “main” makes more sense, regardless of politics, and this encouraged a lot of software to make the default branch configurable.
Agreed. I was interested to read in the article that the master name does indeed originate from master/slave, because that doesn’t map to my mental model of git branching at all. If “main” is a better description and offends fewer people, why not switch? Just seems like opposing a very minor change for the sake of it.
I think the default branch name change has been good for the ecosystem; “master” didn’t always make sense for whatever workflow was used, and it was hardcoded all over a bunch of tooling. I think “main” makes more sense, regardless of politics, and this encouraged a lot of software to make the default branch configurable.
In hindsight I agree, it feels like a better choice anyway - quicker to type and it makes sense. Win win.
That said my concern is that the “cost was zero” - one of the biggest problems with wokeness is it serves to distract from productive actions rather than sanctimony / tokenism / virtue signalling. Perhaps a symptom of twitter syndrome: virtual likes (easy, simple, shallow) vs real change (hard, messy, compromising).
When I start discussing the latest woke language debate, I remember that this pontification is exactly my objection, and that I’d be better off thinking about how I can help people who are poor or homeless or unable to access good schooling, rather than endlessly debating which words to use. There certainly is an opportunity cost, mostly on the political left as it neglects vital issues such as financial inequality, education, health, and deteriorating infrastructure.
Perhaps the best thing I could start with is to quit twitter to rid myself of the distraction? I don’t know. Anyone managed to work out how to navigate this?