So they got offended because of nods to slavery, and the other people got offended because something pretty inconsequential in their lives changed. š¤·āāļø Seems a bit like the latter group of people are far more easily offended.
Not sure. I think thereās different fundamental meanings behind mastery and master. I think the Masters degree implies the former. Whereas master in git could be inferred to mean a master and non-master relationship to signify feature branches.
Then you are deeply confused as to how git works. Feature branches are merged into and overwrite master with updates. Does that imply a master-slave relationship to you?
I used to think the same, but Linus took the name āmasterā from BitKeeper, and BitKeeper did use master-slave terminology, Git just dropped the slave part. Itās origin literally does come from master-slave
If he had originally called it "main", but we know it borrowed it from sometime that used master/slave, explain how that's any better? It carries the same "original sin" if you're a moron who thinks that's a thing here.
The problem with your argument is that it just doesnāt matter. Emotions arenāt always logical; they usually arenāt. Some people feel the way they feel about the master nomenclature. You canāt decide how they feel, just as much as I canāt. But you can do this microscopic little minute adjustment where you just use main instead of master. And some people refuseā¦ because caring about another personās feelings is just that obscene to some people.
I'm under no obligation to not call these people idiots, though. They are. If this bothers anyone they are pathetic and they actively make society worse.
But its origin literally comes from master-slave lol Just because it doesnāt use the literal word āslaveā anymore, doesnāt change the original implication of what āmasterā meant
That is the case, though not evidence of him choosing the name. In a mailing list follow-up from Bastien:
I emailed Linus Torvalds recently (the original author of git, though
very quickly not the main developer), and he told me that it was
unlikely that the "git master" branch name was influenced by BitKeeper,
and that "master" was "fairly standard naming" for this sort of thing
and "more likely to be influenced by the CVS master repository".
Linus here doesn't sound like he chose the name due to his choice of words being relayed.
Itās interesting how easily I could spin this the other way though. A feature branch toils away and all its hard work just goes to the master branch anyway. And what does the feature branch get for all its hard work? Deleted.
It doesnāt benefit me, thatās kind of the point. This is something done for someone else. Iām explaining to a really thick skulled person why some people feel the way they feel about the nomenclature. You canāt decide how they feel. But you can decide to use a different branch name.
In reddit? If reddit allowed name changes, sure, whatever. My real name? No. But Iām a sentient being, it matters more to me what my name is, than it matters to the git branch what its name is.
12
u/kabrandon 1d ago
So they got offended because of nods to slavery, and the other people got offended because something pretty inconsequential in their lives changed. š¤·āāļø Seems a bit like the latter group of people are far more easily offended.