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

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#831

Post by mfontani »

I've had to deal with projects where the "main" branch was named: master, main, blead.

I almost never "name" that "main" branch, thanks to commands and aliases.

When I want to pull (and rebase) to the "main" branch, I run "git prom". When I want to check out the "main" branch, I "git com". What actually happens depends on what the project's "main" branch is. If a project later moves to a "live" branch, I'll just update the "git-main" script to detect it ahead of the rest, and off I go.

https://github.com/mfontani/los-opinionated-git-tools/blob/m... is less than ten lines of bash.

git-com is really just: git checkout "$(git main)"

git-prom is really just: git pull --rebase origin "$(git main)"

I'm not particularly sold on "main" vs "master" being an important thing, but if it's important to some I at least want to ensure I don't get frustrated when interacting with a project which uses it. With the above aliases and functions and programs, I don't care anymore.

main, master, blead... call it whatever.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#832

Post by cphajduk »

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…

To me, "master" and "slave" are historic terms used throughout electrical, software, even entertainment industries.

Eliminating words from a vocabulary is very 1984-like. Those words have a deep historical meaning, allowing ourselves to just "remove them" is akin to forgetting and ignoring the dark past of slavery, rather than remembering and acknowledging it (with the hopes it will never happen again).

Saying that it helps change habits (in my opinion) is analogous to saying that preventing kids from playing violent video games will reduce mass shootings (there is evidence it does not). I disagree with your premise that this pushes us to change habits and is only a mechanism to be ashamed of our shared (and dark) history. Lest we forget.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#833

Post by zzo38computer »

What I have read is that it is only changing the default setting for new repositories, and does not affect existing repositories, and that either way you can still change the default branch name. (I looked, and it also looks like you can now rename any branch easily in GitHub, so maybe that can also help with some things.)

I think that the change is unnecessary, but is probably mostly harmless (although, I do not use git; someone who does might know better than I do).

If you want to import from a different version control system, if it uses a different name such as "trunk", you can keep the same name in a mirror with a different version control system, if that is supported by the system that you are using.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#834

Post by foofoo4u »

nlitened wrote: post #336
Narann wrote: post #33

> So while the tech community was rushing around, trying to do their best impression of a black square post on Insta I remember thinking, “oh for fucks sake, they’ve completely missed the point”. Why? They forgot to talk to people who are actually members of the black community. In practice, big techs don't care about POC, they care about mobs. "Inclusive" words is just what make mobs happy and it's cheaper to do tha…

Is “person of color” an okay thing to say in US? It really rubs me the wrong way (as a non-native English speaker). To me it’s kinda like calling people with long noses “people of nose size”.

Great question about the term "people of color". Reminds me of when Apple posted on their home page, "Racial Equity and Justice Initiative. For equitable education. For a more just justice system. And for Black and Brown businesses.". The part that particularly rubs me the wrong way is the term "Brown" people. And it’s uppercase. Who wants to be called a "Brown" person? I’ve never heard anyone called that before in my life. It’s incredibly degrading and reductionary. If I am Mexican or Indian, the last thing I want to be labeled is "Brown". Thanks for reducing me down to a single divisive term. What is perplexing is that somehow this term is ok and so is "black" and "white". But saying "yellow" or "red" is offensive. This inconsistency is absurd. Those that are pushing this language somehow think they are morally superior to those of the past. But in reality, they have stepped right into their way of thinking — seeing people by "color" and categorizing society based on it.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#835

Post by Dylan16807 »

drngxn wrote: post #706
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…

> What's powerful about this name change is that it pushes us to alter a habit, in my case one embedded deeply in my fingers, something that I do every day without realizing that I'm doing it This is the entire point, this sentence right here.

But you could do that by changing any word. Renaming 'rebase' would be equally effective.

So if that's the point, then it shows that we shouldn't be doing this.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#836

Post by majormajor »

andrepd wrote: post #752
root_axis wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As another black SWE, I'll add that I disagree with your perspective. I think the name change does more harm than good because it trivializes the movement. If the goal is to change minds and open hearts then where appropriate, we should endeavor to communicate in ways that will be well received by those who need to hear the message . Stuff like this is just preaching to the choir and alienating the rest, but also not…

>I think the name change does more harm than good because it trivializes the movement. >If the goal is to change minds and open hearts then where appropriate, we should endeavor to communicate in ways that will be well received by those who need to hear the message. Stuff like this is just preaching to the choir and alienating the rest. > Also not actually changing anything that matters in the lives of black people.…

I think you overstate the level of lasting alienation and understate the cumulative impact that a bunch of small "trivial" changes could have over years.

For a hundred years after the Civil War, and then a solid 50 more after the Civil Rights movement, we had "white people doing nothing" plus "some still-racist white people actively trying to roll things back." Doing things, and keeping the issue in the forefront, even if the things sometime look silly to some people, is going to make us more progress than going back to doing nothing because some people think only the perfect things are worth doing.

(People getting affronted, offended, and alienated by actions that they think are "silly" is another problem entirely... You don't think it'll make a big difference? That's nice. Why are you making a big deal out of it, then? There's a virtue signalling of "look at how more evolved I am to not be fooled by your silly change, and still spot that the world still sucks after it!!")

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#837

Post by barefootcoder »

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…

I have an honest question for you and others who are directly impacted by this, and would love to hear your perspective.

I work on a software team that has the usual level of diversity, an almost equal mix of East Asian, Indian, Middle-Eastern, and White developers, a few women, and not a single black developer. Here's the problem though... I've been part of the screening and interviewing process and we've only had ONE black person apply, he was an immigrant from Africa. He made it all of the way through the interview process, but did not get the job for reasons that I am unaware of, though I did give him a yes vote as he seemed competent and friendly to me.

Given that we have screened and interviewed hundreds of applicants and as far as I'm aware he was the only black developer to apply, how can we as individuals on the team make a difference to try to be more inclusive?

This has been true everywhere that I've worked. In my entire career spanning > 25 yrs I've only had the opportunity to work with one black developer. He was extremely good, but timid, very soft spoken, and too quick to self-judge, leading to him not very proactive at advertising his successes, which was unfortunate as he was doing great work, but not recognized by the majority of the team. When I later became his manager I would go out of my way to ensure that every major accomplishment of his was widely publicized, but by then the perception had already been set.

It seems to me that the root problem is further up than the hiring process -- it feels like it's something that needs to start at a younger age, encouraging more people outside of the usual circle to consider tech as a career in the first place, but maybe I'm not blind to my own short-sightedness and would love to be shown where I personally can effect change.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#838

Post by ankurpatel »

As a South Asian/Indian and an immigrant to USA coming from a lower middle class background, I would argue that just like Blacks we are also disadvantaged but unlike the African Americans South Asians/Indians have taken over the STEM programs. I do not think acts like these make a change but rather change in mentality of the African American community is what matters for their youth to choose careers and opportunities that help them prosper.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#839

Post by chris_wot »

root_axis wrote: post #677
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…

As another black SWE, I'll add that I disagree with your perspective. I think the name change does more harm than good because it trivializes the movement. If the goal is to change minds and open hearts then where appropriate, we should endeavor to communicate in ways that will be well received by those who need to hear the message . Stuff like this is just preaching to the choir and alienating the rest, but also not…

I am genuinely curious: the LibreOffice team changed the file blacklist to excludelist. Do you believe this was just tokenism? I personally thought it was a great thing. But I am interested in hearing your perspective.

Re: GitHub, fuck your name change

#840

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #270

There is a difference between "necessary" and "sufficient". I am (mildly) happy with the name change, but as the author of the piece makes clear, it it not enough in itself, not even close. Maybe you view it as a distraction from real change? However, I'm sure that many of the people publicly dunking on this change have even less interest in more substantial change. GitHub has issues hiring and retaining minorities (…

> "However, I'm sure that many of the people publicly dunking on this change have even less interest in more substantial change."

I'm openly scornful of this change and would absolutely love to see these large companies put their money where their mouth is by putting up meaningful (i.e. large enough to sting them) amounts of cash to create educational and job opportunities for minorities.

Post reply on HN