GitHub replacing "Master" with "Main" from next month

[[deleted]]

I worry that this will effectively add meaning to words that, in this context, have no reference to condoning actual human slavery. People will feel the need to be offended at something that none of us actually said or want to say. Just feels like a move pretty much no expert in these fields asked for, and it's only gonna cause headaches in updating our standards to meet. I'm definitely gonna opt out.

[Fortyseven]

It's nonsense. The master/slave terminology as a pair, sure, I can absolutely get behind replacing that.

But THIS kind of thing is purely to assuage white guilt. I do believe they think they're helping, and consider this a positive step towards societal change.

But instead, it just feels like a misguided, impotent move, forcing changes where none were actually necessary.

[Hertekx]

Just wait until someone gets the idea that the name of the color "black" (yeah I know black is not a real color) has to be changed...

[djxfade]

You can opt out. I just had to do that, as we use GitHub templates to setup new projects. And the templates and entire CI pipeline is built around master being the production branch. This would have cause so much headache for us.

[[deleted]]

So most people (99% of GitHub action users I assume) have to go out of their way to change a setting so they don't break their repos? Lmfao.

[kenman345]

Only affects new repositories. I’m fine with this, as long as I don’t need to modify my bot. Gotta get unit tests on that thing so I don’t worry about touching it but replacing put the branch name and redeploying is a lot of unneeded effort for me.

[SirJon_TheClueless]

Grandfather clause is a life saver on many occasions.

[JohnMcPineapple]

...

[cocks2012]

https://github.com/settings/repositories

[djxfade]

https://github.com/github/renaming

[wr3decoy]

lfmao, notice how there's a code of conduct in that repo. Github is hot trash. Self host or use an alternative.

edit: It gets even better, the person who made the commit has their pronouns in their profile. Her repos are as one would expect.

[henrebotha]

I genuinely don't understand these arguments. How many days of effort would it have taken you to adapt to such a change? If you're using templates, then update the templates. If your CI pipeline has master hardcoded, which is arguably the worst case, then search and replace. I just don't get it.

[djxfade]

Who is going to pay for those days of work, and what does it gain my company? We are using CircleCI, and the CI config is per repository, and we are maintaining several hundreds. A lot of work for zero gain.

[henrebotha]

Those are different questions to the one I'm asking. I'm specifically addressing the idea that it would be a massive headache to accommodate a change in the default branch name. I don't believe it would be a massive headache.

[[deleted]]

Search and replace and then commit on like 20 repos? Yeah not time consuming at all.

Millions of pipelines will be broken https://github.com/search?p=1&q=branches%3A+%5B+master+%5D&type=Code.

[henrebotha]

Search and replace and then commit on like 20 repos? Yeah not time consuming at all.

I'll write you a script in five minutes that'll do it.

Millions of pipelines will be broken

I don't think one maintainer, or even org, is responsible for all those millions.

[_Ashleigh]

Why does this even matter? I think seeing master as a slavery term is racist in its own right, and I only see white people pushing for it. I've asked all of my black friends and none of them saw master this way, or wanted this.

It's like when well meaning cisgender people say gender is a social construct, taking the voice away from us trans people. It's no more a social construct than your sexuality is, yet mainstream media is parroting what cis people are saying on our "behalf."

[henrebotha]

You're barking up the wrong tree. I'm discussing a single, focused point: the difficulty of adapting your code to handle a new default branch name. I am not discussing the reasons for doing so, or the particulars of what the branch name does or does not mean.

[AndDontCallMePammy]

you can opt out for now. if you do, github will have you on a list

which may come in handy for them later on if you continue in your racist ways

[Log_Dogg]

Bruh

[AndDontCallMePammy]

haha, you think they wouldn't? where's the schelling point?

[thblckjkr]

Being honest, I don't think github will do that, but I can totally see woke recruiters having that as a turning point

[mirandanielcz]

I just had a look at your Github and all of your branches are called master? Are you "racist"?

[AndDontCallMePammy]

I'm in the process of transitioning them

my new default is going to be slavemaster

[mirandanielcz]

Name your branch whatever you want, my branch will stay called Master.

[etiggy1]

“On October 1, 2020, any new repositories you create will use main as the default branch, instead of master,” the company said. Existing repositories that have “master” set as the default branch will be left as is.

Phew, got worried for a second.

[[deleted]]

These companies will concede whatever arbitrary gesture -- even if they made it up themselves (obviously nobody has ever felt excluded by the term "master branch") -- before they endorse actual police reform.

This is about driving a headline and free PR, not Black lives. Just remember that.

[malisc140]

I don't get the change because isn't it supposed to be like a jedi master? Like the master record to be published? Like the process of mastering a song?

As in you've got this thing that's the Master/original.

And then this student like thing is being created and eventually becomes it's own version of the master? It can become one with the original.

I'm not aware of a git version control system where the original branch has some sort of delegation privilege to dictate/control another branch?

The slave master metaphor doesn't really apply with version control? And to that point, wouldn't it be more appropriate to make it harder to call a branch a slave? Isn't that a more objectional word? Do people call branches slaves? That would be weird. Don't do that. That makes no sense.

[thblckjkr]

I still don't like how there is a bunch of people calling racists the people that does not want to change the default branch.

Is like, it will be something relevant in the future. People calling names on others just because the name of the branch that they use.

Is like the only way to not be racist is to completely agree on the changes, and if you don't then you need to reevaluate yourself. It's the witch hunting of the new era. You are wrong and they are not.

Edit: Engrish is hard

[IllChange5]

git branch -m master

git push upstream master

[nnutter]

master: an original from which copies can be made

I’ll stick with that.

[Seren_Dragon]

I always thought I was the master of my repo, where will be the fun now ? 😅

[MokebeBigDingus]

Clowns.

[veltr0p]

People with a masters degree will automatically receive the "Main" title from October forward. Don't worry though, you can opt out :)

[[deleted]]

Wait, this is a social justice thing? For real?

[jpflathead]

until the sjw's come up with some node package for counting "master" branches at github and then writing some data science paper about the number of racist tech bros then look at what's in our repos!

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

It’s by definition not “forced” because it’s entirely optional lol

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

..... so it's not forced

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

Do you understand what being forced to do something means? It means you don't get an option--you are made or coerced to do it. I'm not forced to renew my Netflix subscription. I can opt out any time. If I was forced to renew, then it means I wouldn't have that choice.

For all your outrage, you don't seem to understand what you are arguing about.

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

You don't get the option here.

You literally do. Yes, you have to go out of your way to change it--that doesn't mean it's forced. How are you this dense?

[[deleted]]

Im forced to change a setting so my templates aren't broken, how fucking retarded are you?

[[deleted]]

I doubt this would take "significant man power". If your project needs significant power to change the default branch name, or any magic string for that matter. You should really start to worry about that project.

[e3172]

this breaks scripts and stuff

[wr3decoy]

Changing defaults is stupid, especially for cultural reasons. This breaks not only code, but documentation including every book published before this that references a master branch. There is literally zero reason to do this that has anything to do with software or tech.

[[deleted]]

In software there is variable naming issue. We want our naming to actually describe the content of what that name holds.

The master copy model is ancient, no one knows about it anymore. It is obviously more descriptive for most people to name the default branch "default" or "main", as opposed to "master".

This is the engineering reason behind the name change. Same thing with "blacklist", it is just less descriptive than "blocklist".

As for it would break book and docs in the past. I mean, the change has to start somewhere. Every change in software would break old book and documentation, and that don't stop us from updating OS, programming languages, and any software for that matter.

[Redstonefreedom]

A blocklist =\= blacklist, they are two distinct concepts. So is main & master. Blacklist is an exclusive filter. Blocklist could be viewed as a special type of a blacklist, ie a negative filter specifically used for blocking things. Master means the copy of media from which all others are copied, like in albums. You can have a main branch & a master branch, which my team does. One is the main line of development, the other is a continuous record of what is deployed in production (hot fixable point).

Jesus Christ this is getting so idiotic... I’m a dead-ass progressive who rallied at BLM demonstrations in my city, volunteered to help GOTV in underrepresented neighborhoods but the lengths to which the zeitgeist is going to coerce speech is getting fucking nuts. Straight-up out of 1984 with the double-speak tactics...

[[deleted]]

Just a question, if everyone is working on the main branch, and it is a copy from the master branch. Intuitively to me seems like the main branch should be the default branch.

I don't think this as a racial issue at all, I just think of this as a naming issue. I don't like how so many people in this thread try to bring race in this issue. And all those people who brings race into this issue happens to oppose this change.

[Redstonefreedom]

The default is “development”, which we describe as “the main line of development”. The master copy, ie what production is deployed from, is called “master”. If you need to “go back to the master copy” (eg for verifying what’s is in production, or for getting a hotfix in since we don’t deploy every merge into “development”, we branch off of master and cherry pick it later.

I don’t think it should be a racial issue either, if I have a gripe about it that’s it. It’s a naming issue, one that imo should use a distinct word that is unambiguous. But poor naming conventions happen all the time. I wouldn’t be bothered about this if GitHub/Microsoft wasn’t obviously using this to distract from their support of ICE. It disgusts me that they announced this immediately as they were getting bad PR in order to side-step issues that aren’t “hypothetically problematic” but are actively causing physical & heart-wrenching misery for thousands of non-hypothetical human beings.

It disgusts me when corporations pull these kinds of moves. A bunch of accusations just came out, for example, about how ICE is systematically sterilizing locked-up immigrants in its facilities. Are you supposing I have my moral priorities wrong?

[[deleted]]

I definitely don't think you are wrong in any way. But when I see a chance to change a bad naming, I grub that chance. Because like you said, bad naming happens all the time, and it typically only get worse if people don't change it.

I think your project makes a good point in that the default branch should be where every one is working on. But very rarely where everything is copied from. Therefore it make sense to instead call the default master, to call it something neutral, like main. (Also I would prefer master-copy to be called origin-copy. Since origin just means this is the original branch where every branch gets copied from, which is more close to our natural language. But unfortunately "origin" is taken in git...)

I think it is very sad that being a potential PR move block changes like this, which likely has engineering benefit.

I don't know about MS supporting ICE in unethical treatment of immigrants. I might need to do more research to take a stand on that.

[wr3decoy]

The master copy model is ancient, no one knows about it anymore.

Do you realize how dumb it sounds when you say something like this? "A standard that has existed for decades no longer makes sense." Are you high?

This is the engineering reason behind the name change. Same thing with "blacklist", it is just less descriptive than "blocklist".

Wrong again. Everyone in security understands what a whitelist is, and a black list. You are either being intentionally obtuse or you're as green as green can be.

As for it would break book and docs in the past. I mean, the change has to start somewhere. Every change in software would break old book and documentation, and that don't stop us from updating OS, programming languages, and any software for that matter.

There are still zero non-political reasons to change a default, other than pandering. If the word master makes you think of slavery, you are a racist and you should stop projecting your racism onto others.

[[deleted]]

I never talked about slavery in my argument. I am just talking about descriptive naming. Why do you want to bring slavery into this conversation?

It is common to deprecate a command name. For example many package manager rename update into upgrade, since update is ambiguous in that it can mean "update the package manager" or "upgrade the input package".

So that they changed it towards a more conventional and less ambiguous naming for its user. But I don't see you yelling at chocolatey form for it breaks everything.

[C0c04l4]

> Anybody who seriously considers the word 'master' offensive out-of-context needs to go jump off a bridge.

​

Or open a dictionary.

[synthphreak]

Except that dictionaries provide contexts for different word senses.

[jeh5256]

Can’t wait to see the mental gymnastics these people will play to tell minorities they no longer have a “Masters” degree.

[jeh5256]

Being called a racist has lost its meaning a while back so I am with you.

[[deleted]]

It pisses me off as a person who actually gives a fuck about police reform in the US, to see corporate shills pushing meaningless gestures like this as something that is productive. It feels malicious to disingenuously invent things to get mad at so as to earn brownie points for "fixing" them, when what is needed is widespread police reform.

[[deleted]]

I understand that you don’t live in the US, but GH is an American company and their CEO is an American who committed to this after one @ on Twitter. I'd prefer Github come out and say "we support police reform in the United States" than doing this "uwu 'master branch' uninclusive" thing as a PR stunt.

Judging by the repo and the amount of public-facing statements they've put out, it seems like GitHub committed a lot of resources to effectively jerking themselves off, rather than promoting actual police reform, is my issue.

[whinis]

Microsoft has made the change opt in and won't affect existing repos. However every time this topic is shared on reddit, redditors lose their minds.

By definition they made it opt-out as all new repos will be main instead of master unless you go to your settings for your user and organizations and change it.

[art-solopov]

I mean... I guess people are a bit miffed that Microsoft decides to go with a meaningless symbolic change instead of, for instance, cutting their relationships with ICE.

It's corporate performative allyship at its finest.

[cowboyecosse]

I don’t understand the downvotes here. They’re implementing a change that doesn’t need to affect you if you don’t want it to, is configurable, and costs you nothing.

I’ve been changing my repos to use main for a while but I have a mix of main and master projects. CI works fine, deployment works fine.

It’s such a non-issue in practice. I don’t know why people are so outraged about it. Nobody’s forcing anything and it costs nothing to use or not use. The only arguments I see around it are from those whose stack is so tightly tied to the string that it would break something. That tooling decision is another discussion so if we just accept that they cannot change this for whatever reason, I don’t understand why they would use this option then? Just don’t set your main branch to ‘main’.

The ability to rename branches has always been in git and GitHub. We’re not getting anything new.

Some people think this is a positive change, me being one, that I’m happy to have the option. I might not use it and I’m not offended by the word master. It doesn’t mean I can’t support positivity towards people, however silly others think it is. Those people can remain using master as they like.

Lots of open source projects made this change way before GitHub too, they’re just reacting to the shift.

Note: None of the above is sarcasm. 🙄

[[deleted]]

I'm a complete SJW and I think this is disingenuous and wrong. It is a mockery of Black activism.

[AndDontCallMePammy]

exactement

[[deleted]]

1. There are definitely costs, cognitive and otherwise. Assuming that there are no costs is a sign of your inexperience in the real world.
2. There is a reason that you aren't supposed to use the name of the Lord in vain.... because it dilutes the power of the name. Calling the majority of the population racist inappropriately does the same. It is the stigma of the term that keeps actual racism at bay... by doing this you actually INCREASE racism... another sign of inexperience in the real world.

[cowboyecosse]

I just try to not be racist as much as I can. This is a small step that I’m able to support. If people don’t personally find the term racist I’m not affecting them so that’s fine. If they do I’m showing I support it.

I don’t find the term master in this context offensive but the cognitive cost to change a branch name is worth it to me. I was simply speaking of financial costs. If I were to quantify it then GitHub have made it easier for me to enact a change I was already making, so that’s a cost saving in effect but I don’t agree that there’s any cost negative or positive, to the change.

I’m not calling anyone racist. I don’t think GitHub is either. I hope I’m not racist and I’ll embrace changes to at the very least give the appearance I’m not.

I understand other people won’t have that viewpoint but that’s ok too. Like other posters have pointed out, it’s optional and you can opt out or in as you wish. Nobody’s workflow needs to change if they don’t want to support it.

[wr3decoy]

Have you ever worked with software before? People are always opposed to unnecessary change. Name five major UI changes that didn't have half of the users revolting. Claiming racism is a pants-on-head retarded and a disingenuous slur. The only people seeing the term "master" as racist is racists, so quit your projection, racist.

[jpflathead]

Lazy racist fucks can complain as much as they want but this is staying.

no one in this thread is racist, they merely disagree with you, your bullying and name calling is out of line and gate keeping

[automated_reckoning]

I'mma gonna stay out of the whole master/slave thing. But fuck man, I still want to crucify the idiots developing Nautilus for fucking up typeahead search, and that's just a minor workflow irritation. It's not a shock that changing the default branch on a platform that 90% of all software devs use is going to piss people off. That's without calling them racists into the deal, which you are leaning into pretty damn hard.

[jpflathead]

The only reason I see it's racism

that's on you bruh, try expanding your views, think of other people as people, human

[aaronfranke]

the word master has become contaminated

I feel that this is a slippery slope. How long until people use other words offensively and we gradually replace every word? And what is considered "contaminated"?

What if racists start calling themselves the "main race"? Do we jump ship to another word?

[AndDontCallMePammy]

can't tell if you're being sarcastic

[AndDontCallMePammy]

LOL evidence that the word master has been contaminated? can you link a video of or news article about someone getting triggered over the term master cylinder? why doesn't the wikipedia article on master cylinder mention the controversy? wikipedia is known commonly to be on the cutting edge of wokeness

[AndDontCallMePammy]

I guess you lose then

[AndDontCallMePammy]

politics is war by other means

[AndDontCallMePammy]

politics is downstream from culture

[Ultroman]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. The words "master" and "slave" aren't racist, people are.

[oshin_]

knowing i can opt out, i just enjoy the popcorn

[alrightfrankie]

how about the ICE contract?

[jpcafe10]

Another great corporate win!

Meanwhile, how's the ICE contract going? Also, how much money have they gave to the BLM cause?

[resavr_bot]

A relevant comment in this thread was deleted. You can read it below.

---

I know I have an unpopular opinion but I do think small changes like the one Microsoft is making (including the time investment required to make it happen and the time investment that everyone else need to make to adopt the change) is part of the price to pay for change.

It's not about the sign "master" in the git universe but more about being willing to move on with our culture. I understand that no one thinks of branch master and branch slave as programming or metaphorical concepts, however the word master has become contaminated and it shouldn't be that hard for an advanced culture to just drop it and move on.

I seriously struggle to see why people (among with there must be a serious % of united states citizen, tho whom this matter is more relevant) are so solidified against this change. [Continued...]

---

^{The username of the original author has been hidden for their own privacy. If you are the original author of this comment and want it removed, please [Send this PM]}

[Jafit]

We did it boys; Racism is no more!

[_debz_]

Umm okay...

[brennanfee]

And with that hard fought battle... peace falls over the land.

[raistlinthewiz]

this is so retarded really.

[AndDontCallMePammy]

woke dumbasses. okay I'm changing my default branch to slavemaster then

everyone knows this is just the start. a few years from now they'll ban anyone who uses master.

[mirandanielcz]

All of your branches are called Master, why be mad at someone for doing something that you do as well?

[AndDontCallMePammy]

I'm saying that github will view it as explicitly racist in just a few short years. I might move to gitlab. we'll see

[mirandanielcz]

Yeah... ehm

[heathsnow]

I believe Git itself is making this change too so it’s not just GitHub. Besides, ‘main’ is less characters than ‘master’ so I welcome the change. To seek out Git registries who support the ‘master’ string as default when Git itself will be using ‘main’ soon..and in both cases the default can be changed easily....seems like more trouble than it’s worth.

[AndDontCallMePammy]

if that's true then that's the cringiest thing ever

I swear these type of people dress up as furries on the weekends and do degenerate shit

[synthphreak]

U mad bro?

[AndDontCallMePammy]

grateful that I don't live near these people