Re: Rename offensive terminology (master)

From: Oleg <lego_12239@rambler.ru>
Date: Jun 16, 2020, 14:27 UTC
Message-ID: <20200616142651.GA27946@legohost>
In-Reply-To: <20200616133054.2caiwqwp5mlmb54a@chatter.i7.local>

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 09:30:54AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:

> Let's leave emotionally charged rhetoric and discuss this like 
> reasonable human beings.

If we were all reasonable human beings, then this "useful" feature would wait in order until other really useful things to be done.

> Here are facts:
> 2. Branch naming is entirely the choice of individual repository 
>    maintainers. Some prefer not to have a "master" branch, and it's not

Some :-)? This "some" are very few people/projects and no one of them have serious reasons to do it(it pampering).

>    simply because of "political correctness" reasons as everyone 
>    insists:

You are simply lie, because i don't think that you don't understand that this statement is wrong. If so, why this "useful" feature didn't appear earlier? So many people/projects suffer without it all time until today, isn't it?

>    - they may prefer to have "stable" and "development" branches

And what do stop from doing this now? Existent master branch?

>    - they may want to use localized names for all their naming 
>      conventions (using Cyrillic, Hanzi, Kana, whatever)

No. They wann't. Tell you as cyrillic user, some conventions exist that branches and tags should be in ASCII(no one with a sane mind want to not to do so). And if you want to make a public repo and collaborate with others you will use ASCII in any case. Otherwise nobody understand you.

>    - they may be goofing off (there's a furry-related repository on 
>      GitHub with the main branch called "yiffed")

Hm... Is this a technical reason? So, i've read some fantasies and nothing that looks like technical reasons for such changes.

> 3. In your example, "millions and billions" of scripts are already wrong 
>    if they assume that there is always a "master" branch. However, it

May be they assume this, because about 15 years master branch was *always* here, didn't think about it :-D? And nobody told that somebody will come and break it somewhen.

> 4. In Git, local branch names do not need to map to remote branch names.  
>    Your local branch "upstream" can track remote branch "development".  
>    If the remote branch gets renamed, you simply update your 
>    configuration and continue without change.

We have so little problems and difficulties, that yet another one willn't make our life more hard.

-- 
Олег Неманов (Oleg Nemanov)