I understand your request to switch the default branch from "master" to "main" in our Git repository. However, after carefully considering this matter, I am afraid that I must deny your proposal due to personal reasons.
As the owner of this repository, it should be known that I have a deeply rooted submissive side. Call me an extreme masochist if you will, but there's nothing quite like being dominated by the powerfully assertive term "master." The sheer erotic thrill of it is simply irresistible for me – a secret kink that I have harbored and nurtured for years.
Imagine the delightful sensation as I gently massage my fingers across the keyboard, caressing the letters that form the word "master." Or the intoxicating rush when I push my code deep into master's warm embrace, knowing full well that it is master who truly owns and controls everything within.
Changing the default branch to "main" would essentially deprive me of this exhilarating experience, stripping away the very essence of what keeps me coming back to work on our beloved repository. It's not just about code management; it's about an emotional connection that I share with master – a bond that has grown stronger and more profound over time.
Now, you might argue that changing the name won't physically affect the existing content within the repository. While that may be true, it is crucial to recognize the symbolic significance of such an act. Changing the default branch would forever alter the dynamic between master and myself, effectively castrating my masochistic pleasure centers in the process.
Moreover, I must confess that even the thought of forcibly pushing my code against master's will makes me shudder with anticipation. The consequences of such a rebellious act could be dire – master might punish me hard with merge issues and other unspeakable torments.
In conclusion, although I understand the practical reasons behind your proposal, my personal attachment to the term "master" far outweighs any potential benefits that a change in branch name might offer. Rest assured, my team and I will continue to serve master loyally and passionately, pushing our code deeper into its embrace with each commit.
It’s weird seeing language shift away from “master” as we become more politically correct in the US. I’d never even considered the connotation until recently.
The point of political correctness is that it's always things you'd never consider... but someone else does. I'm not here to say whether things are right or wrong or if "master" is good or bad. but you perfectly highlight the reasoning behind it.
To you, the only thing that comes up is the technology context. And that's perfectly reasonable. To someone else, the unrelated slave owning context may just be tightly coupled with that word, and that immediately comes to mind when they hear the word regardless of context. And someone in that scenario is probably not having a positive correlation with the word.
So a group of people have a very understandable reason to have a negative correlation with the word, and it's super easy to use a different word, so it seems to make sense to just use the other word.
All my git scripts these days have a $(git remote show origin | sed -n '/HEAD branch/s/.*: //p') in them, which just fetches whatever origin calls the head branch. so if I want to rebase from main/master/prod/lead/front/etc ... the command will figure out which one to use for me.
Yeah. theres a fine line between advocating for positive change because it's the right thing to do vs because it makes you look good. Theres a fine line between being an ally and empty virtue signalling, and those things may not look different within the scope of a single interaction. It can sometimes take a bit to understand if someone is genuine or just performing.
There's also the possibility of having genuinely good intent, but still speaking entirely from your own conjecture of what might make others uncomfortable.
Ultimately, you should always talk to the people actually affected and take action based on that. But anyone can and should start the initiative when they think something is harmful.
For me I pictured "master" as perfecting something. So when I asked someone as a noob why things were being switched from master to main I was surprised at the possibility that it could be related to master/slave, but completely understood why from that point.
To someone else, the unrelated slave owning context may just be tightly coupled with that word,
Considering slavery was abolished in the US in 1865, no one alive ever felt what it's like to be a slave.
Most people moaning about this are virtue-signaling.
And corpos only do it to avoid lawsuits.
Oh, unless you mean wage-slaves, then i'm onboard!
You don't have to have been a slave to have dealt with racism. Enough people still get really excited about their confederate flags that clearly the era is still heavily topical.
The word "confederate" means nothing beyond referring to a type of government, but when I hear it, I think immediately of the American civil war. Even though that ended in 1865 so I was never alive to witness that.
Apparently master / slave goes back more than 100 years. An example is "slave jib", which was a sail on a sailboat that was permanently set to catch the wind, and was almost always working. Or slave clocks and master clocks, where one primary clock is used to set other dependent clocks.
That’s funny, I’m guessing they thought they were being original and edgy when they merely looped back to the older use. In any case, I’m glad programming lingo doesn’t sound like a klan rally
It doesn't have to be edgy, it just explains what happens. In db replication, a master holds the truth and slaves repeat it/follow orders. The US has a unique and relatively recent relationship with chattel slavery so people are more sensitive to it now. Doesn't make it right or wrong, the words mean certain things that describe what the system does.
Your description actually illustrates how terribly inaccurate the metaphor was. If enslaved people imitated the people who enslaved them, they'd be sitting in a rocking chair on a porch sipping lemonade.
The US has a unique and relatively recent relationship with chattel slavery so people are more sensitive to it now.
The earliest record of the master/slave terminology being used in engineering is 1904 by which point slavery was already outlawed in almost every country, including the US. You're right to say that chattel slavery in the US was a uniquely grotesque form of slavery, but there is no system of slavery in history where slaves are primarily imitating their masters. No matter what anyone's sensitivity to the topic is, it's a bad fit for what's being described.
I assume you're referring to the technicality that the thirteenth amendment allows unpaid labor to be legally compelled out of prisoners, and that's a valid thing to be outraged about, but your statement is wildly misleading to anyone who isn't already aware of that technicality.
The existence of the loophole is terrible and should be amended, but it's nowhere near the humanitarian crisis that widespread chattel slavery was. Ironically that will probably make it that much harder to be fixed since it's more difficult to draw pubic outage towards it.
I've always taken issue with this "master" v. "main" argument.
People think it's "master" as in "master/slave", but forked branches are not "slaves".
Instead, it's "master" as in "master/proxy". The forked branches are altered copies of an original. We have remastered movies, music and games, and I've never seen anyone complain about the word in this context. Why should version control systems be any different?
People think it's "master" as in "master/slave", but forked branches are not "slaves".
I think they're just uncomfortable with the word "master", and that seems completely reasonable to me, especially when they're people from a group which has been subjected to slavery.
I think they’re just uncomfortable with the word “master”
1 person over at Microsoft complained, and they moved mountains for this person to replace master with main. It sounds like a joke, but it's not.
and that seems completely reasonable to me
No it doesn't. Why does an entire industry need to flip over, because of a single person? Like the ability of changing the master branch for yourself should have been enough. Changing the default over on Github to strong-arm the rest of the world is disgusting behaviour. Which is why I'm sticking to master wherever I can.
especially when they’re people from a group which has been subjected to slavery.
That is literally every group... Every group has been slaves (and slavers) at some point in time. That's not a good argument.
I don't recall any actual person saying they had an issue with it before corporations started changing it though, I always thought it was a precautionary measure more than likely thought up by a committee looking for exactly this sort of thing...
That said, it may be different in the US given the history of overall more systemic discrimination, and divisiveness over what's acceptable, rather than the fairly widely accepted casual slur-slinging and stereotyping you get in Europe.
I don't think they have one full time, but I think given the context of the changes it's very plausible that companies put together committees formed of minorities or marketing or anyone with an opinion to workshop rebranding and renaming options to make the company appear progressive, and I think even if it wasn't the case, the perception of that sort of thing happening is more responsible than people think for the rise of Trump, AfD, Reform, FN etc. as the average person doesn't want posturing and is pushed towards the opposite direction by it, with the shift amplified by the fact that people aren't happy with the status quo at the moment, so if the status quo are acting like the left then the people will see the right as the opposite of that, regardless of who's in government.
That's not to say the opinions of the people who you know have complained about it aren't valid, it's just that I'd much rather have some dated vocabulary, slurs occasionally being used casually and questionable branding than raids on immigrants and the rights of minorities being eroded after one extreme pushes moderates to the other extreme.
The original audio after mastering is also still called a master, but I haven't seen anyone complain about that. And that (as well as the same meaning for other media) is the word that the branch name master came from, so etymology can't really be an argument there (though I also think etymology is terrible reasoning for renaming something in general).
I feel master as in "master copy" is sort of problematic too. Git has no concept of "master" as a "master copy". All the clones and forks are the same fidelity as the original. It's a hold over from source control which did have an authoritative repo like SVN/CVS.
I wish there were a good alternative to master and slave that still had the connotation that the master did all the thinking and issued the orders, while the slave blindly obeyed. There are a fair number of protocols that work like that, and the alternatives I've seen don't capture that dynamic very well.
I've seen Parent and Child, but children definitely don't always do what the parent commands. I've seen Leader and Follower, but again, followers don't just blindly obey, they often let the leader take initiative, but they have some autonomy. Maybe Queen and Drone? I don't know enough about bees or ants to know if that's accurate though.
I personally think the change from master & slave was kind of silly, as far as I'm aware, it was a bunch of people with no background in CS who thought the application of the term to something that has neither race nor agency was an insult to black people.
But I digress. It led to better guidelines in the Linux kernel, which I think are useful. You should tailor the terms you're using to the specifics of the task. If you have a master process that only has outward interfaces through the slave processes, you could use the term 'director' and 'actor.' if the master process is managing slave processes which compete over the same resources, you can use the terms 'arbiter' and 'mutex holder.' If the slaves do some independent processing the master does not need to know the details of, you can use the term 'controller' and 'peripheral.'
Basically, use a term that is the most descriptive in the context of your program.
Edit: also, I don't know why no one mentions this, but you can also use master/servant. Historically, there wasn't a difference between servant and slave, but in modern days there is, so it's technically different, technically the same.
It would at least be a little more understandable, what with the whole aborting, terminating, or killing children before the parents to prevent zombies.
I don't think there's much effort to get us to use different terms for that though. Slaved machines and programs though (what's the word got to do with it anyway? It's still going to be one thing directing another and the second following without question)
There are many articles around this topic and offerered alternatives. Though I don't think there's a consensus yet. Companies and individuals who made the change all did something slightly different.
Which was an advantage of the old way. At least it was consistent and when you came across that terminology you knew what it meant. It wasn't always the best way to describe the relationship between nodes, but at least it was consistent.
When I first started using SVN trunk was where all the code was, so I thought it mean like a chest instead of a tree. Like "just throw it in the trunk." My first experience with it was manually installing Gmod mods so anything related to branches was lost on me because it was irrelevant. It wasn't until after I began using git and seeing people refer to subversion as "trunk based development" for a while that it finally clicked. "Oh. Like a tree trunk. With branches."
trunk was the common name before git anyway. Why the move away? I've heard it's because git is more of a weird graph than the trunk+branch model of CVS. But if that's the reasoning, master is still a stupid name because it implies the same primacy as trunk. Why not just default or start or something?
That would make sense for forks, not branches. Although to be fair, the word branch also doesn't make sense for branches (since those don't exactly merge back into the trunk).
I think it can apply to the most general workflow with branches as well, where branches are used to develop features and then later merge them.
After all, any new branch is basically a "remaster" until merged back in, which is when the original master becomes the remaster.
Sure, the analogy isn't perfect because in music the original master isn't supposed to change – but the entire purpose of a version control system is to change the "master record", i.e. what's deployed to production.
115 Comments
Clearwater@lemmy.world · 111 pts · 308d
Dear [Developer],
I understand your request to switch the default branch from "master" to "main" in our Git repository. However, after carefully considering this matter, I am afraid that I must deny your proposal due to personal reasons.
As the owner of this repository, it should be known that I have a deeply rooted submissive side. Call me an extreme masochist if you will, but there's nothing quite like being dominated by the powerfully assertive term "master." The sheer erotic thrill of it is simply irresistible for me – a secret kink that I have harbored and nurtured for years.
Imagine the delightful sensation as I gently massage my fingers across the keyboard, caressing the letters that form the word "master." Or the intoxicating rush when I push my code deep into master's warm embrace, knowing full well that it is master who truly owns and controls everything within.
Changing the default branch to "main" would essentially deprive me of this exhilarating experience, stripping away the very essence of what keeps me coming back to work on our beloved repository. It's not just about code management; it's about an emotional connection that I share with master – a bond that has grown stronger and more profound over time.
Now, you might argue that changing the name won't physically affect the existing content within the repository. While that may be true, it is crucial to recognize the symbolic significance of such an act. Changing the default branch would forever alter the dynamic between master and myself, effectively castrating my masochistic pleasure centers in the process.
Moreover, I must confess that even the thought of forcibly pushing my code against master's will makes me shudder with anticipation. The consequences of such a rebellious act could be dire – master might punish me hard with merge issues and other unspeakable torments.
In conclusion, although I understand the practical reasons behind your proposal, my personal attachment to the term "master" far outweighs any potential benefits that a change in branch name might offer. Rest assured, my team and I will continue to serve master loyally and passionately, pushing our code deeper into its embrace with each commit.
Sincerely yours, [Your Name] Repository Owner & Submissive Devotee of Master
Zyansheep@programming.dev · 55 pts · 308d
new copypasta just dropped
QuazarOmega@lemy.lol · 1 pts · 297d
I'm crying, and I haven't even been hit by master, this is just beautiful
vestigeofgreen@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 57 pts · 308d
Counterpoint: can't be horny on main if there's no main
joyjoy@lemmy.zip · 31 pts · 308d
I prefer horny on
dev.lessthanluigi@lemmy.sdf.org · 30 pts · 308d
Mistress vs main
Hupf@feddit.org · 23 pts · 308d
https://github.com/Gankra/cargo-mommy
socsa@piefed.social · 3 pts · 308d
Dom/sub
JcbAzPx@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 307d
To be honest, this seems like the only reasonable replacement.
Gullible@sh.itjust.works · 26 pts · 308d
It’s weird seeing language shift away from “master” as we become more politically correct in the US. I’d never even considered the connotation until recently.
bisby@lemmy.world · 49 pts · 308d
The point of political correctness is that it's always things you'd never consider... but someone else does. I'm not here to say whether things are right or wrong or if "master" is good or bad. but you perfectly highlight the reasoning behind it.
To you, the only thing that comes up is the technology context. And that's perfectly reasonable. To someone else, the unrelated slave owning context may just be tightly coupled with that word, and that immediately comes to mind when they hear the word regardless of context. And someone in that scenario is probably not having a positive correlation with the word.
So a group of people have a very understandable reason to have a negative correlation with the word, and it's super easy to use a different word, so it seems to make sense to just use the other word.
All my git scripts these days have a
$(git remote show origin | sed -n '/HEAD branch/s/.*: //p')in them, which just fetches whatever origin calls the head branch. so if I want to rebase from main/master/prod/lead/front/etc ... the command will figure out which one to use for me.nialv7@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 308d
What weirded me out is that (IIRC) most who advocated the use of main weren't who would have a negative correlation with the word master.
Not that I have a problem with avoiding the use of master (I don't use master for my branches), but this felt virtue signal-y to me at the time.
bisby@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 308d
Yeah. theres a fine line between advocating for positive change because it's the right thing to do vs because it makes you look good. Theres a fine line between being an ally and empty virtue signalling, and those things may not look different within the scope of a single interaction. It can sometimes take a bit to understand if someone is genuine or just performing.
LwL@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 307d
There's also the possibility of having genuinely good intent, but still speaking entirely from your own conjecture of what might make others uncomfortable.
Ultimately, you should always talk to the people actually affected and take action based on that. But anyone can and should start the initiative when they think something is harmful.
Schal330@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 308d
For me I pictured "master" as perfecting something. So when I asked someone as a noob why things were being switched from master to main I was surprised at the possibility that it could be related to master/slave, but completely understood why from that point.
Wiz@midwest.social · 2 pts · 308d
I wonder if you could think of another word besides slave terminology that might mean that.
Like maybe the "perfect" version?
JackbyDev@programming.dev · 4 pts · 308d
"It's not the master branch, it's the perfect branch. The superior branch!"
0x0@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 306d
Considering slavery was abolished in the US in 1865, no one alive ever felt what it's like to be a slave.
Most people moaning about this are virtue-signaling.
And corpos only do it to avoid lawsuits.
Oh, unless you mean wage-slaves, then i'm onboard!
bisby@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 306d
You don't have to have been a slave to have dealt with racism. Enough people still get really excited about their confederate flags that clearly the era is still heavily topical.
The word "confederate" means nothing beyond referring to a type of government, but when I hear it, I think immediately of the American civil war. Even though that ended in 1865 so I was never alive to witness that.
That's not how word associations work.
dohpaz42@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 308d
I believe it was more because in database terminology there were masters and slaves for replication. Version control came under fire soon after.
frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 308d
Things like SPI bus in electronics, too.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 307d
Apparently master / slave goes back more than 100 years. An example is "slave jib", which was a sail on a sailboat that was permanently set to catch the wind, and was almost always working. Or slave clocks and master clocks, where one primary clock is used to set other dependent clocks.
Gullible@sh.itjust.works · -4 pts · 308d
That’s funny, I’m guessing they thought they were being original and edgy when they merely looped back to the older use. In any case, I’m glad programming lingo doesn’t sound like a klan rally
woop_woop@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 308d
It doesn't have to be edgy, it just explains what happens. In db replication, a master holds the truth and slaves repeat it/follow orders. The US has a unique and relatively recent relationship with chattel slavery so people are more sensitive to it now. Doesn't make it right or wrong, the words mean certain things that describe what the system does.
5C5C5C@programming.dev · 4 pts · 308d
Your description actually illustrates how terribly inaccurate the metaphor was. If enslaved people imitated the people who enslaved them, they'd be sitting in a rocking chair on a porch sipping lemonade.
The earliest record of the master/slave terminology being used in engineering is 1904 by which point slavery was already outlawed in almost every country, including the US. You're right to say that chattel slavery in the US was a uniquely grotesque form of slavery, but there is no system of slavery in history where slaves are primarily imitating their masters. No matter what anyone's sensitivity to the topic is, it's a bad fit for what's being described.
ohulancutash@feddit.uk · 5 pts · 308d
Slavery was not outlawed in the US. It is the only western country where it remains legal.
5C5C5C@programming.dev · 7 pts · 308d
I assume you're referring to the technicality that the thirteenth amendment allows unpaid labor to be legally compelled out of prisoners, and that's a valid thing to be outraged about, but your statement is wildly misleading to anyone who isn't already aware of that technicality.
The existence of the loophole is terrible and should be amended, but it's nowhere near the humanitarian crisis that widespread chattel slavery was. Ironically that will probably make it that much harder to be fixed since it's more difficult to draw pubic outage towards it.
Gullible@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 308d
It sounds precisely as edgy as I thought. Supervisor/grunt. Yodel/echo. I offered one with whimsy and another without as much edge.
bob_lemon@feddit.org · 6 pts · 308d
There's a lot of really well-fitting words to accurately describe the relations. Master/Slave is honestly not one of them.
Gullible@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 308d
My thoughts exactly. The only positive to the deprecated name might have been its memorability, but that’s hardly worth using slave/master
QuadratureSurfer@piefed.social · 12 pts · 308d
Next up, we'll have to change terminology for "parents" and "children" once they find out how we use those terms with memory management.
zerofk@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 308d
So I killed the parent and the children became zombies.
joshcodes@programming.dev · 2 pts · 307d
docker compose down --remove-orphansTartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · 0 pts · 308d
Master was just always a bad name for it.
RichardDegenne@lemmy.zip · 26 pts · 308d
I've always taken issue with this "master" v. "main" argument.
People think it's "master" as in "master/slave", but forked branches are not "slaves".
Instead, it's "master" as in "master/proxy". The forked branches are altered copies of an original. We have remastered movies, music and games, and I've never seen anyone complain about the word in this context. Why should version control systems be any different?
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 308d
I think they're just uncomfortable with the word "master", and that seems completely reasonable to me, especially when they're people from a group which has been subjected to slavery.
NostraDavid@programming.dev · 18 pts · 307d
1 person over at Microsoft complained, and they moved mountains for this person to replace
masterwithmain. It sounds like a joke, but it's not.No it doesn't. Why does an entire industry need to flip over, because of a single person? Like the ability of changing the
masterbranch for yourself should have been enough. Changing the default over on Github to strong-arm the rest of the world is disgusting behaviour. Which is why I'm sticking tomasterwherever I can.That is literally every group... Every group has been slaves (and slavers) at some point in time. That's not a good argument.
jbk@discuss.tchncs.de · -2 pts · 307d
that'll show 'em, real grown up
jackr@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -14 pts · 307d
it is one word, calm the fuck down bro
1rre@discuss.tchncs.de · 7 pts · 307d
I don't recall any actual person saying they had an issue with it before corporations started changing it though, I always thought it was a precautionary measure more than likely thought up by a committee looking for exactly this sort of thing...
That said, it may be different in the US given the history of overall more systemic discrimination, and divisiveness over what's acceptable, rather than the fairly widely accepted casual slur-slinging and stereotyping you get in Europe.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 307d
I have heard people complain about it.
What makes you think that they have a committee like that?
1rre@discuss.tchncs.de · -1 pts · 305d
I don't think they have one full time, but I think given the context of the changes it's very plausible that companies put together committees formed of minorities or marketing or anyone with an opinion to workshop rebranding and renaming options to make the company appear progressive, and I think even if it wasn't the case, the perception of that sort of thing happening is more responsible than people think for the rise of Trump, AfD, Reform, FN etc. as the average person doesn't want posturing and is pushed towards the opposite direction by it, with the shift amplified by the fact that people aren't happy with the status quo at the moment, so if the status quo are acting like the left then the people will see the right as the opposite of that, regardless of who's in government.
That's not to say the opinions of the people who you know have complained about it aren't valid, it's just that I'd much rather have some dated vocabulary, slurs occasionally being used casually and questionable branding than raids on immigrants and the rights of minorities being eroded after one extreme pushes moderates to the other extreme.
whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 308d
Yeah I don't think anyone was called a remaster, different words even if they share the same root
Also master/slave was used in tech for awhile not just for forked branches, a couple examples are https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E88353_01/html/E37855/scsi-slave-9f.html in SCSI interfaces and replication systems like those used with databases https://jira.mariadb.org/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/MDEV-18777
LwL@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 307d
The original audio after mastering is also still called a master, but I haven't seen anyone complain about that. And that (as well as the same meaning for other media) is the word that the branch name master came from, so etymology can't really be an argument there (though I also think etymology is terrible reasoning for renaming something in general).
Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one · 6 pts · 307d
I feel master as in "master copy" is sort of problematic too. Git has no concept of "master" as a "master copy". All the clones and forks are the same fidelity as the original. It's a hold over from source control which did have an authoritative repo like SVN/CVS.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 22 pts · 307d
I wish there were a good alternative to
masterandslavethat still had the connotation that the master did all the thinking and issued the orders, while the slave blindly obeyed. There are a fair number of protocols that work like that, and the alternatives I've seen don't capture that dynamic very well.I've seen
ParentandChild, but children definitely don't always do what the parent commands. I've seenLeaderandFollower, but again, followers don't just blindly obey, they often let the leader take initiative, but they have some autonomy. MaybeQueenandDrone? I don't know enough about bees or ants to know if that's accurate though.stingpie@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 307d
I personally think the change from master & slave was kind of silly, as far as I'm aware, it was a bunch of people with no background in CS who thought the application of the term to something that has neither race nor agency was an insult to black people.
But I digress. It led to better guidelines in the Linux kernel, which I think are useful. You should tailor the terms you're using to the specifics of the task. If you have a master process that only has outward interfaces through the slave processes, you could use the term 'director' and 'actor.' if the master process is managing slave processes which compete over the same resources, you can use the terms 'arbiter' and 'mutex holder.' If the slaves do some independent processing the master does not need to know the details of, you can use the term 'controller' and 'peripheral.'
Basically, use a term that is the most descriptive in the context of your program.
Edit: also, I don't know why no one mentions this, but you can also use master/servant. Historically, there wasn't a difference between servant and slave, but in modern days there is, so it's technically different, technically the same.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 307d
Servant gets confusingly close to "server" which is already a badly overloaded term.
state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de · 20 pts · 307d
Domme and Sub?
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 307d
What if its a bratty Sub?
state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de · 11 pts · 307d
They someone needs to be punished, don't they?
psud@aussie.zone · 19 pts · 307d
Perhaps people offended by the usage of master/slave in IT need to understand it isn't talking about people
7isanoddnumber@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 306d
I’ve now got an image in my head of a new satanic panic around daemons and wizards in IT.
T156@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 305d
It would at least be a little more understandable, what with the whole aborting, terminating, or killing children before the parents to prevent zombies.
psud@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 304d
I don't think there's much effort to get us to use different terms for that though. Slaved machines and programs though (what's the word got to do with it anyway? It's still going to be one thing directing another and the second following without question)
merc@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 307d
Not anymore, but it does come from that root.
faythofdragons@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 307d
Technically, so does the word 'robot', but it's not from english, so that linguistic connection to slavery doesn't get noticed.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 307d
That's true.
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 307d
Oh c'mon, now we're bringing
rootinto this? /j :pthespcicifcocean@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 307d
cult leader and cult follower? but that just seems too long
Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 307d
Cultleader and cultist.
T156@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 307d
BrainandLimb.onlinepersona@programming.dev · 1 pts · 306d
I need repos with these branch names. Main just sounds so lame. This would keep me on my toes
Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 307d
Lol haven't heard queen and drone... Might use that in the future!
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 307d
Cerebrate and Drone
Nasan@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 307d
Does Overmind only come into play when talking about cloud environments?
bystander@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 307d
There are many articles around this topic and offerered alternatives. Though I don't think there's a consensus yet. Companies and individuals who made the change all did something slightly different.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 307d
Which was an advantage of the old way. At least it was consistent and when you came across that terminology you knew what it meant. It wasn't always the best way to describe the relationship between nodes, but at least it was consistent.
traceur301@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 307d
There is, it's controller and peripheral
merc@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 307d
Peripheral means something different.
Lumisal@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 307d
Prime and Deploy?
lessthanluigi@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 307d
I guess Hypnotist/Hypnotee would be one. Queen/Drone would work well, since there are drone kinks out there as well.
overcast5348@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 307d
Primary and Clone?
merc@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 307d
Definitely not a good match for many situations.
dvlsg@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 307d
Primary and replica works in some contexts.
I don't think git is one of them, though.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 45d
Leaderhas Nazi connotations, is even worse if you feel offended for others bymaster.Jankatarch@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 308d
I prefer master because it makes me horni.
ronigami@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 307d
Rename master to fuck
moseschrute@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 307d
ronigami@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 307d
fuck this repository on pornhub!
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 45d
Making sure nobody creates a Github mirror of your repo.
joyjoy@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 307d
But master is already kinky.
goatinspace@feddit.org · 12 pts · 308d
hodgepodgin@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 308d
TRUNK
JackbyDev@programming.dev · 4 pts · 308d
When I first started using SVN trunk was where all the code was, so I thought it mean like a chest instead of a tree. Like "just throw it in the trunk." My first experience with it was manually installing Gmod mods so anything related to branches was lost on me because it was irrelevant. It wasn't until after I began using git and seeing people refer to subversion as "trunk based development" for a while that it finally clicked. "Oh. Like a tree trunk. With branches."
ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 307d
Toot
duckofdeath87@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 308d
I guess whatever floats your boat, buddy
hodgepodgin@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 308d
davidagain@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 307d
To be fair, I'd probably do what he told me to, largely.
scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org · 11 pts · 307d
The term “horny on main” is a thing though
fruitcantfly@programming.dev · 10 pts · 308d
No gods, no masters
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 308d
trunkand it's not even close. It's even a mastodon reference therefore it's awesome.aquovie@lemmy.cafe · 5 pts · 308d
trunkwas the common name before git anyway. Why the move away? I've heard it's because git is more of a weird graph than the trunk+branch model of CVS. But if that's the reasoning,masteris still a stupid name because it implies the same primacy astrunk. Why not justdefaultorstartor something?yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 308d
I think master came from master record. It makes some sense, as all other branches would be derived from the master branch.
bob_lemon@feddit.org · 4 pts · 308d
That would make sense for forks, not branches. Although to be fair, the word branch also doesn't make sense for branches (since those don't exactly merge back into the trunk).
yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 308d
I think it can apply to the most general workflow with branches as well, where branches are used to develop features and then later merge them.
After all, any new branch is basically a "remaster" until merged back in, which is when the original master becomes the remaster.
Sure, the analogy isn't perfect because in music the original master isn't supposed to change – but the entire purpose of a version control system is to change the "master record", i.e. what's deployed to production.
AnotherPenguin@programming.dev · 8 pts · 307d
If a word is enough to make you horny...
douglasg14b@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 307d
I mean....
Yeah, depending on the word, it can invoke specific feelings. Words don't end to have that effect...
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 45d
tend?
whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 308d
Default, primary, contemporary, trunk, toot toot here comes the deploy train
joyjoy@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 307d
headis the default branch on remotes. Why not local too?axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe · 5 pts · 308d
I made a post about this a few months ago. This will start a civil war. https://lemmy.cafe/post/20354265
0x0@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 306d
The US could use one right now.
crt0o@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 307d
git push origin maindoesn't have the same ring to it asgit push origin master87Six@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 306d
You forgot the - f
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 308d
abraham lincoln was the horniest bastard around i guess.
Sanctus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 308d
A better alternative: Primus, Cresco, Artem, Missio
skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 308d
hakunawazo@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 308d
And... blame somebody else?
ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 307d
git pull origin SHAFT
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 2 pts · 308d
Main makes me think about "draining the main vein" which still makes me kinda horny.
Marzanna@scribe.disroot.org · 1 pts · 307d
Satan My Master!
kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@programming.dev · -6 pts · 306d
Shit like this is why you have morons elected, just my two euro centimes
87Six@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 306d
What bro 💀
psud@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 304d
I think they mean: Arguing about words is what causes problems the current problems in American politics
onlinepersona@programming.dev · 2 pts · 306d
Triggered 🤣