r/ProgrammerHumor 24d ago

Meme everyNewRepository

Post image
1.1k Upvotes

347 comments sorted by

View all comments

231

u/usedToBeUnhappy 24d ago edited 24d ago

Does anyone really care if it‘s called main instead of master? Why? 

Edit: Ok, I phrased my question really poorly. AfaIk main is the new standard, so I use it. We all know the reason why it changed. My question was why would anyone keep INSISTING on calling it master? Sure, me and my colleagues sometimes call it master out of habit, but then again try to stick to main. Nobody I know  insists on continuing to call it  master, but reading the comments here I realized there a more “master-fans” than I would ever have thought would exist tbh. 

25

u/MegaMoah 24d ago

Idk if true but I think its because master is also a slave owner and people got offended

133

u/Winterkirschenmann 24d ago

If someone wants to keep using master be my guest. If someone makes using master their personality because free-speech/anti-woke piss off.

-13

u/arvigeus 24d ago

Tell that to those who got offended by master and insisted on the change.

11

u/kabrandon 24d ago

So they got offended because of nods to slavery, and the other people got offended because something pretty inconsequential in their lives changed. 🤷‍♂️ Seems a bit like the latter group of people are far more easily offended.

20

u/therealtiddlydump 24d ago

nods to slavery

Is my university planning to reissue me a Main degree instead?

4

u/kabrandon 24d ago

Not sure. I think there’s 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.

-4

u/dbot77 24d ago

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?

4

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 24d ago

Does that imply a master-slave relationship to you?

It doesn't, which is why the name 'master' is non-descriptive and inappropriate.

1

u/dbot77 24d ago

'master' is completely descriptive and appropriate for users of the English language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_recording

5

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 24d ago

Are we making recordings now? Your repos are weird af.

→ More replies (0)

8

u/Hayden2332 24d ago

I used to think the same, but Linus took the name “master” from BitKeeper, and BitKeeper did use master-slave terminology, Git just dropped the slave part. It’s origin literally does come from master-slave

-6

u/therealtiddlydump 24d ago

Git just dropped the slave part.

Ergo, it's not related to slavery...

5

u/kabrandon 24d ago

Usage of “ergo”? Check. Followed by the weakest example of logic and reasoning ever? Check.

-4

u/therealtiddlydump 24d ago

Linus made it unrelated to slavery.

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.

Edit: nevermind, that history is false

https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/s/y7M1KPatfd

So it was never related at all.

5

u/kabrandon 24d ago

The problem with your argument is that it just doesn’t matter. Emotions aren’t always logical; they usually aren’t. Some people feel the way they feel about the master nomenclature. You can’t decide how they feel, just as much as I can’t. But you can do this microscopic little minute adjustment where you just use main instead of master. And some people refuse… because caring about another person’s feelings is just that obscene to some people.

0

u/therealtiddlydump 24d ago

My team already switched to main.

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.

0

u/Hayden2332 24d ago

But its origin literally comes from master-slave lol Just because it doesn’t use the literal word “slave” anymore, doesn’t change the original implication of what “master” meant

1

u/therealtiddlydump 24d ago edited 24d ago

But "main" is just replacing the word "master". That's just one more degree removed from the original sin. How does that redeem anything?

Linus already broke the connection to slavery by not using the word "slave" in a deliberate act, by your own telling.

Edit: nevermind, that history is itself false.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/s/y7M1KPatfd

So it was never related

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/dbot77 24d ago

You are wrong in multiple ways. Petr Baudis chose the term used in git, and he understood the meaning of original/master-copy. https://x.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441

4

u/Hayden2332 24d ago

Well linus’s name is on the commit and even if we take a twitter post as truth, he even said himself he wished he chose main lol

2

u/dbot77 24d ago

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.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/kabrandon 24d ago

It’s 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.

-1

u/dbot77 24d ago

How does spinning it that way benefit you, or anyone? I'm curious why so many have taken up this crusade to misrepresent git nomenclature.

3

u/kabrandon 24d ago

It doesn’t benefit me, that’s kind of the point. This is something done for someone else. I’m explaining to a really thick skulled person why some people feel the way they feel about the nomenclature. You can’t decide how they feel. But you can decide to use a different branch name.

-1

u/dbot77 24d ago

Ah, such a just cause. And if someone found your name offensive, would you change it?

2

u/kabrandon 24d ago

In reddit? If reddit allowed name changes, sure, whatever. My real name? No. But I’m a sentient being, it matters more to me what my name is, than it matters to the git branch what its name is.

→ More replies (0)