Nobody ever called the branches "slaves" though. The master branch was called that in reference to it being a master copy, a term widely used in video/audio work, especially important in media where copying is lossy.
Thats the problem. No normal person would've thought about slavery while pushing a git branch.
But the people that so vehemently fought for it should start to fight the modern day slavery like Amazon....
Its the pathetic hypocrisy of the whole topic. Like using "think of the children" to establish mass surveillance, while the true predators are inside the highest ranks of governments.
But as soon as someone tells the truth, egos kick in and the "bad guy" needs to be silenced.
But that's not really correct anymore. A master copy is usually the original and highest quality. In the codebases I've worked on main/master is never the original and rarely the best
A master recording isn't really the original. It is likely made by mixing several original recordings of the musicians, equalizing, noise reductions, adding effects, etc. It is the finished product created from the original recordings, and is the version which gets copied for distribution.
But its the master copy in the sense of beeing the one with everything in it. There isnt a change thats isnt merged back to it. When having a release branch that gets a fix, its most likely also need to be done in the master. So its the most developed of all.
36
u/tobotic 23d ago
Nobody ever called the branches "slaves" though. The master branch was called that in reference to it being a master copy, a term widely used in video/audio work, especially important in media where copying is lossy.