But why even? There’s no risk to changing it and some risk to keeping it. That’s the reason for the push to change it. Keeping something just because it’s tradition isn’t a good idea outside ceremonies.
Yes exactly. It’s a reference to the recording industry’s practice of calling the final version of an album the “master” which gets sent for duplication.
Sadly? Master branch never implied the existence of a slave branch. It was one of the dumbest pieces of woke incursion into tech.
It was kind of pointless, but at least it made software work with custom default branches.
But why even? There’s no risk to changing it and some risk to keeping it. That’s the reason for the push to change it. Keeping something just because it’s tradition isn’t a good idea outside ceremonies.
It’s the principle of letting uneducated people dictate what words are acceptable to us
More like overeducated people
overeducated people who can’t see that “master” has multiple meanings.
What makes you think they’re uneducated?
Yes exactly. It’s a reference to the recording industry’s practice of calling the final version of an album the “master” which gets sent for duplication.
In alignment with this, we should not replace the master branch with the main branch, we should replace it with the gold branch.
Every time a PR gets approval and it’s time to merge, I could declare that the code has “gone gold” and I am not doing that right now!
Merged -> gone gold
Deployed -> gone platinum
Gone a week without crashing production -> triple platinum
Yeah agreed. Just another piece of white devs acting like they knew better for everyone.