• Integrate777@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I always rename my branch to main. Because it’s shorter? That’s the extent of my reasoning. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Main.

    Don’t get me wrong, the whole debate is Microsoft just being performative (why not use your vast wealth to actually help people?). But honestly, putting the debate aside, “main” is just a clearer and more intuitive name.

  • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s a retroactive bastardization of the word based on one particular culture’s one particular interpretation of it (master being, apparently, a slaveowner) that ignores both the much earlier meanings of master artisan or master craftsman (as opposed to journeyman and apprentice) and masterpiece (through which an artisan is recognised as a master), and the modern meaning of a master copy (like a master record in disc printing).

    This isn’t like replacing the “master and slave” terminology with regard to connected devices. That one was warranted because it was often inaccurate and confusing. But forcing the adoption of main instead of master feels like someone got offended on someone else’s behalf because a word looked superficially like that other bad word, and apparently we can’t have an understanding that goes deeper than what letters it’s made up of.

    Amerika ist wunderbar. This is an --initial-branch=master household.

    • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      regardless of that, it’s never inconvenienced me and it’s still a net gain in readability, since main actually means what it means. have my shell scripts set up to use either one for any repo I’m in automatically.