{"thread":{"id":"58300","subject":"\"master\" term - no one cares","startedAt":"2022-08-13T02:57:59Z","lastAt":"2022-08-14T17:19:32Z","messageCount":6,"participants":["Ryan","Felipe Contreras","Philip Oakley","demerphq"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"461160","messageId":"6896FBE4-9160-4969-8969-D92F9FE19F14@gmx.com","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"\"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"Ryan","fromEmail":"rmrmail@gmx.com","sentAt":"2022-08-13T02:57:46Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-13T02:57:59Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"rmrmail@gmx.com","avatar":null},"body":"I installed the windows version of git today and was annoyed with the “woke” message stating that the “master” branch term will be changed to a different name to be more “inclusive\".\n\nDon’t waste your time, just get rid of this annoying woke question in your installer. Very annoying!! No one thinks git has anything to do with slavery. On the plus side, git is great, I just started learning it. Thanks!\n\nRyan\n\n"},{"id":"461161","messageId":"CAMP44s2A7nJDVRPbixPPPtTedg_Q53CEdw+sBpGZwOfQG4EZSg@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":"6896FBE4-9160-4969-8969-D92F9FE19F14@gmx.com","subject":"Re: \"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"Felipe Contreras","fromEmail":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","sentAt":"2022-08-13T03:15:52Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-13T03:16:11Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8358?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 10:10 PM Ryan wrote:\n>\n> I installed the windows version of git today and was annoyed with the “woke” message stating that the “master” branch term will be changed to a different name to be more “inclusive\".\n>\n> Don’t waste your time, just get rid of this annoying woke question in your installer. Very annoying!! No one thinks git has anything to do with slavery. On the plus side, git is great, I just started learning it. Thanks!\n\nThis is not a Git issue, this is a Git for Windows[1] issue: they are\nthe ones exposing that message to their users at installation time.\n\nYou can raise the issue in their issue tracker [2], but I wouldn't\nhold my breath.\n\n[1] https://gitforwindows.org/\n[2] https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues\n\n-- \nFelipe Contreras\n"},{"id":"461175","messageId":"0dddb367-ebf9-930f-1b9c-000a532774d3@iee.email","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":"CAMP44s2A7nJDVRPbixPPPtTedg_Q53CEdw+sBpGZwOfQG4EZSg@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: \"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"Philip Oakley","fromEmail":"philipoakley@iee.email","sentAt":"2022-08-13T16:55:51Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-13T16:55:58Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"philipoakley@iee.email","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/914343?v=4"},"body":"On 13/08/2022 04:15, Felipe Contreras wrote:\n> On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 10:10 PM Ryan wrote:\n>> I installed the windows version of git today and was annoyed with the “woke” message stating that the “master” branch term will be changed to a different name to be more “inclusive\".\n>>\n>> Don’t waste your time, just get rid of this annoying woke question in your installer. Very annoying!! No one thinks git has anything to do with slavery. On the plus side, git is great, I just started learning it. Thanks!\n> This is not a Git issue, this is a Git for Windows[1] issue: they are\n> the ones exposing that message to their users at installation time.\n>\n> You can raise the issue in their issue tracker [2], but I wouldn't\n> hold my breath.\n>\n> [1] https://gitforwindows.org/\n> [2] https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues\n>\nThanks for the comment. The wider point is to ensure that everyone can \nchoose their own name for their primary line of development (plod), no \nmatter how fast or slow they plod along.\n\nThere is a confusion between the use of the term that refers to the \n*personal* mastery of a _craft_ or _artisan_ technique and, at least one \nof, the historical choices for the usage of the term 'master', which was \na direct reference to slave servitude. That was for the use of \nelectrical circuits which would detect the 'tick' of a primary timing \npendulum and then have all the actual clock faces that indicated the \ntime be _driven_ from that 'master'.\n\nThe previous discussion include that of [1], in which I reference the \npaper (it's [4]) regarding the chronometer (clock) .\n\n--\nPhilip\n\n[1] \nhttps://lore.kernel.org/git/4bbc8658-4dad-10ef-65a4-8f0f4f4fffd4@iee.email/\n"},{"id":"461181","messageId":"CAMP44s1XOyMgX+4hHzNXpUmJ0DURn93=B9dH0pBm5Fk5YRfdvg@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":"0dddb367-ebf9-930f-1b9c-000a532774d3@iee.email","subject":"Re: \"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"Felipe Contreras","fromEmail":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","sentAt":"2022-08-14T02:05:42Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-14T02:05:58Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8358?v=4"},"body":"On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 11:55 AM Philip Oakley wrote:\n> On 13/08/2022 04:15, Felipe Contreras wrote:\n\n> > This is not a Git issue, this is a Git for Windows[1] issue: they are\n> > the ones exposing that message to their users at installation time.\n> >\n> Thanks for the comment. The wider point is to ensure that everyone can\n> choose their own name for their primary line of development (plod), no\n> matter how fast or slow they plod along.\n\nEveryone can choose their own name without being asked. All software\nhas dozens if not hundreds of default configurations that the user is\nnot forced to choose at installation time. When I type \"bash\" I'm not\nasked what kind of prompt I would like, that would be annoying. I can\nchoose to change my bash prompt any time I want, or I could choose to\nkeep using the default.\n\nWe don't ask users what name they would like for the remote every time\nthey clone a repository, we use \"origin\", and that's fine. The user\ncan choose a different origin with --origin, or just use the default.\n\nBeing forced to make an *unnecessary* choice is just annoying, but we\nall know why the Git for Windows project is annoying their users and\nit has nothing to do with technical aspects and everything to do with\n*personal* politics.\n\n> There is a confusion between the use of the term that refers to the\n> *personal* mastery of a _craft_ or _artisan_ technique and, at least one\n> of, the historical choices for the usage of the term 'master', which was\n> a direct reference to slave servitude. That was for the use of\n> electrical circuits which would detect the 'tick' of a primary timing\n> pendulum and then have all the actual clock faces that indicated the\n> time be _driven_ from that 'master'.\n\nThis may be the reason why some people used that name in the past, but\nit's not the reason I use it.\n\nFor me if I was cloned there wouldn't be two equally valid versions of\nme, *I* am the original one, I am the \"master\" copy. This doesn't\nchange if my clone is cloned in turn.\n\nThis is exactly how master branches in git are used. I have a master\nbranch of git.git, but it's not *the* master branch. *The* master\nbranch is the branch from which all the other branches came from,\nincluding \"maint\" and \"next\", and all the dozens of branches in\nthousands of other repositories. If the word \"master\" makes it sound\nmore important than all the other branches in all the other\nrepositories, it's because it is.\n\nRegardless of what name people use and for what reason, the reality is\nthat \"master\" is still very widely used, despite of the campaign\nagainst it which was clearly driven by ideological reasons. And it's\nalso a reality that the world is not going to end if users are not\nbeing forced to pick that one controversial configuration at\ninstallation time.\n\nCheers.\n\n-- \nFelipe Contreras\n"},{"id":"461188","messageId":"CANgJU+U_xgghdX58XsAY7dNUj1dE8STviTAL0ygycnAesZ+VxQ@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":"CAMP44s1XOyMgX+4hHzNXpUmJ0DURn93=B9dH0pBm5Fk5YRfdvg@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: \"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"demerphq","fromEmail":"demerphq@gmail.com","sentAt":"2022-08-14T08:26:21Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-14T08:26:38Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"demerphq@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"On Sun, 14 Aug 2022, 04:35 Felipe Contreras, wrote:\n>\n> On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 11:55 AM Philip Oakley wrote:\n> > There is a confusion between the use of the term that refers to the\n> > *personal* mastery of a _craft_ or _artisan_ technique and, at least one\n> > of, the historical choices for the usage of the term 'master', which was\n> > a direct reference to slave servitude. That was for the use of\n> > electrical circuits which would detect the 'tick' of a primary timing\n> > pendulum and then have all the actual clock faces that indicated the\n> > time be _driven_ from that 'master'.\n>\n> This may be the reason why some people used that name in the past, but\n> it's not the reason I use it.\n>\n> For me if I was cloned there wouldn't be two equally valid versions of\n> me, *I* am the original one, I am the \"master\" copy. This doesn't\n> change if my clone is cloned in turn.\n>\n> This is exactly how master branches in git are used. I have a master\n> branch of git.git, but it's not *the* master branch. *The* master\n> branch is the branch from which all the other branches came from,\n> including \"maint\" and \"next\", and all the dozens of branches in\n> thousands of other repositories. If the word \"master\" makes it sound\n> more important than all the other branches in all the other\n> repositories, it's because it is.\n>\n> Regardless of what name people use and for what reason, the reality is\n> that \"master\" is still very widely used, despite of the campaign\n> against it which was clearly driven by ideological reasons.\n\nFWIW, I was a part of ensuring two large codebases did not use the\nterm \"master\" when they migrated to git long before it became a\nsubject of controversy. Not because I had concerns over the\nmaster/slave word association (it really wasnt on my mind) but simply\nbecause the word \"master\" is too overloaded, and its use as a name\nleads to all sorts of weird sentences involving the phrase \"master\nmaster\", which for newbies especially can be really confusing. I\nfound that introducing newbies to the concepts of distributed version\ncontrol goes much more smoothly when the \"primary\" branch is not\ncalled \"master\", as it avoids the need to understand that there are\nvarious different copies of the \"master\" branch where either only one\nor none of them are actually master branches. Just writing this\nparagraph makes me itch from having to distinguish the different uses\nof the word master.\n\nSo while it is indisputable that what you call \"ideological reasons\"\nreally pushed this initiative into the public consciousness I think\nthere were and are a lot of us who are quite happy to support the\nmovement simply because we think using a word which (in English) has\nmultiple Noun, Adjective and Verb definitions is a poor choice for the\n*name* (Proper Noun) of an arbitrary artifact, especially when those\ndefinitions will likely be applied to thing being named. That the\nphrase \"master master\" is in our vocabulary is a horrorshow. To me it\nis not unlike naming someone's two children \"Run\" and \"Slowly\". Who is\ngoing to understand what the heck \"Run, Slowly, run slowly!\" means?\n\nThe fact you need to distinguish <\"the\" master> from other uses of the\nword \"master\" when talking above is to me a clear indication how bad a\nname choice it was. I get it, from certain perspectives, it is an\nattractive name, but if you zoom out a bit, it just seems to regularly\nlead to unfortunate sentences, at least in English. Try explaining how\nthe \"master\" branch is used to someone who knows nothing about tech,\nlike your Grandmother, or Uncle or something, I bet they are totally\nlost within the first sentences. At least if they are English\nspeakers, other languages may overload the word differently. Dont\nforget to explain the difference between \"canonical master\" like\nLinus'es master master, and distinguish it from the various other\n\"master\" branches that would be out there, and how most of them aren't\nthe master at all.\n\nAnyway, just my $0.02. Thanks for listening.\n\ncheers,\nYves\n"},{"id":"461199","messageId":"CAMP44s11TqNPvH3EuzRu-hjB7zOT9zqOquopUS6tk16mjJGQKQ@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"58300","inReplyTo":"CANgJU+U_xgghdX58XsAY7dNUj1dE8STviTAL0ygycnAesZ+VxQ@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: \"master\" term - no one cares","fromName":"Felipe Contreras","fromEmail":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","sentAt":"2022-08-14T17:19:15Z","receivedAt":"2022-08-14T17:19:32Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8358?v=4"},"body":"On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 3:26 AM demerphq wrote:\n>\n> On Sun, 14 Aug 2022, 04:35 Felipe Contreras, wrote:\n> >\n> > On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 11:55 AM Philip Oakley wrote:\n> > > There is a confusion between the use of the term that refers to the\n> > > *personal* mastery of a _craft_ or _artisan_ technique and, at least one\n> > > of, the historical choices for the usage of the term 'master', which was\n> > > a direct reference to slave servitude. That was for the use of\n> > > electrical circuits which would detect the 'tick' of a primary timing\n> > > pendulum and then have all the actual clock faces that indicated the\n> > > time be _driven_ from that 'master'.\n> >\n> > This may be the reason why some people used that name in the past, but\n> > it's not the reason I use it.\n> >\n> > For me if I was cloned there wouldn't be two equally valid versions of\n> > me, *I* am the original one, I am the \"master\" copy. This doesn't\n> > change if my clone is cloned in turn.\n> >\n> > This is exactly how master branches in git are used. I have a master\n> > branch of git.git, but it's not *the* master branch. *The* master\n> > branch is the branch from which all the other branches came from,\n> > including \"maint\" and \"next\", and all the dozens of branches in\n> > thousands of other repositories. If the word \"master\" makes it sound\n> > more important than all the other branches in all the other\n> > repositories, it's because it is.\n> >\n> > Regardless of what name people use and for what reason, the reality is\n> > that \"master\" is still very widely used, despite of the campaign\n> > against it which was clearly driven by ideological reasons.\n>\n> FWIW, I was a part of ensuring two large codebases did not use the\n> term \"master\" when they migrated to git long before it became a\n> subject of controversy. Not because I had concerns over the\n> master/slave word association (it really wasnt on my mind) but simply\n> because the word \"master\" is too overloaded, and its use as a name\n> leads to all sorts of weird sentences involving the phrase \"master\n> master\", which for newbies especially can be really confusing. I\n> found that introducing newbies to the concepts of distributed version\n> control goes much more smoothly when the \"primary\" branch is not\n> called \"master\", as it avoids the need to understand that there are\n> various different copies of the \"master\" branch where either only one\n> or none of them are actually master branches. Just writing this\n> paragraph makes me itch from having to distinguish the different uses\n> of the word master.\n\nSure, each person's mileage may vary, but personally I've never used\nthe phrase \"master master\", it's always \"master's upstream\", or\n\"origin's master\", or something else. And I have no trouble realizing\nthat \"master\" is different from \"origin/master\".\n\n> So while it is indisputable that what you call \"ideological reasons\"\n> really pushed this initiative into the public consciousness I think\n> there were and are a lot of us who are quite happy to support the\n> movement simply because we think using a word which (in English) has\n> multiple Noun, Adjective and Verb definitions is a poor choice for the\n> *name* (Proper Noun) of an arbitrary artifact, especially when those\n> definitions will likely be applied to thing being named. That the\n> phrase \"master master\" is in our vocabulary is a horrorshow. To me it\n> is not unlike naming someone's two children \"Run\" and \"Slowly\". Who is\n> going to understand what the heck \"Run, Slowly, run slowly!\" means?\n\nI disagree. English speakers have no problem with words that have\nmultiple meanings, the word \"run\" has hundreds of them, and people\nkeep using it. And as I said, \"master master\" is not in my vocabulary.\n\nMoreover this usage is already part of the English language, there's\nmaster key, master bedroom, master copy, master record. Somehow the\nmusic industry doesn't have a problem dealing with multiple master\nrecords.\n\nIf you personally want to use another name, go right ahead, but for\nmany of us \"master\" is a perfect name, and more importantly: a\nperfectly fine default name.\n\nCheers.\n\n-- \nFelipe Contreras\n"}]}