Github changes branching terminology.

[pcs3rd]

Within the last few days, github has decided that the Terms 'master' and 'slave' with 'main' and so-on. The decision was odly made as a tweeted suggestion.

There are currently arguments on twitter on wether or not that this is a distraction from black equality or a step forward.

 

Quote

 

GitHub is working on replacing the term "master" on its service with a neutral term like "main" to avoid any unnecessary references to slavery, its CEO said on Friday.

The code-hosting portal is just the latest in a long line of tech companies and open source projects that have expressed support for removing terms that may be offensive to developers in the black"

 

https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-term-to-avoid-slavery-references/

 

Personally, I think this is dumb and it will break everyone's automation  scripts.

 

[AlTech]

BRB. Lemme just move all my GitHub stuff to GitLab real quick.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

good. 

[Jurrunio]

That's what happens when we share the world with someone who are easily offended and think everyone else who do not speak up are the same. 

 

but hey what do I know, my mother tongue literally turn swear words into adjectivies within a couple of years.

[AlTech]

Just now, VegetableStu said:

isn't the master-slave computing terminology.... super old? o_o

Yeah.

 

It's been around as long as computers have been around.

Just now, Jurrunio said:

That's what happens when we share the world with someone who are easily offended and think everyone else who do not speak up are the same.

Yup.

[BuckGup]

I don't really care one way or another how they label things I'm just confused as the term master and slave has no racial attachment to it. You can be any race and be a master and/or slave. If it had the prefix white attached to it I would see a big problem but it doesn't. 

[Eigenvektor]

1 minute ago, BuckGup said:

I don't really care one way or another how they label things I'm just confused as the term master and slave has no racial attachment to it. You can be any race and be a master and/or slave. If it had the prefix white attached to it I would see a big problem but it doesn't. 

You can't really treat another person as a slave, while also respecting them as a human being. Meaning a slave is pretty much always seen as "lesser". You are right that master/slave can apply to any person, regardless of race, color, gender, etc. but it is often based on discrimination against "something" (including race).

 

I honestly don't care if the principal development branch of my project is labeled as "master" or "main". It may be a pain for existing projects and require some time to get used to it, but overall it doesn't really matter.

[DrMacintosh]

It's a tough sell for me to believe that the terminology was racially motivated when it was created. Abstract ideas do in fact exist. However I could care less about what arbitrary terminology and code styles developers use. It's their funeral. Programming is depressing enough as it is, if someone was offended by the terminology, I'm sure they are grateful its being changed on GitHub.

 

I could see an argument being made to stop using whitelist/blacklist. I don't see how those terms intuitively mean what they are defined as and I could buy that those terms are racially motivated. 

[Jurrunio]

3 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

You can't really treat another person as a slave, while also respecting them as a human being. Meaning a slave is pretty much always seen as "lesser". You are right that master/slave can apply to any person, regardless of race, color, gender, etc. but it is often based on discrimination against "something" (including race).

but we're talking about codes here, do computers even have "rights" us masters can take away? Would our sense of "rights" even be meaningful to electronics?

[Vishera]

???????

Doing unnecessary changes that were uncalled for,just to please a certain group (for PR) or portray solidarity is outrageous and ridiculous.

[Eigenvektor]

Just now, VegetableStu said:

yes, it's wrong in the humanities aspect. would you apply the same kind of anti-discrimination to USB drives plugged into a computer?

I've been using git for a long time and I've never associated "master" with anything bad. But if it makes some people feel better, I've no real issues with changing it. I've only recently read other topics that e.g. want to change "blacklist" to "blocklist" and "whitlist" to "allowlist".

 

Similarly only recently ZFS changed their wording for "slave" drives to "dependents".

 

DNS changed "master/slave" to "primary/secondary" some years ago and there are other examples.

 

2 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

but we're talking about codes here, do computers even have "rights" us masters can take away? Would our sense of "rights" even be meaningful to electronics?

Yeah, but at the same time what does "slave drive" even mean? Does it mean the drive is being forced against its will to work without pay? As the Ars Technica article I linked to points out, in a lot of cases changing the wording can actually improve clarity. As a technical person I know what a slave drive is, but I've had quite a few people look at me funny when they heard it the first time.

[pcs3rd]

3 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

but we're talking about codes here, do computers even have "rights" us masters can take away? Would our sense of "rights" even be meaningful to electronics?

Even further, in this context, the terms 'master' and 'slave' are only being used to describe the flow of data and service types, similar to unix's 'parent' and 'child', not the status of a person or living thing.

[Haro]

I don't understand this 

Why would someone think that far into something 

I would not for the life of me even think of using this term in such context 

It's literally code who will get offended by terms used for codes ?

[Vishera]

Seems like that idea is either a work in progress or dismissed,the change was not made.

[DuckDodgers]

25 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

isn't the master-slave computing terminology.... super old? o_o

The e-commerce system I'm in charge of supporting is still classifying linked products variations as "master/slave" relations, in the ERP backend.

If some special snowflake happens to skim throughout our internal email correspondence, it might as well get PTSD for life, since every other mail is plastered with "master" and "slave" words.

[Vishera]

Just now, TofuHaroto said:

I don't understand this 

Why would someone think that far into something 

I would not for the life of me even think or using this term in such context 

It's literally code who will get offended by terms used for codes ?

Those are the kind of people who deliberately look for something to be offended by.

[Eigenvektor]

1 minute ago, pcs3rd said:

Even further, in this context, the terms 'master' and 'slave' are only being used to describe the flow of data and service types, similar to unix's 'parent' and 'child', not the status of a person or living thing.

True, they are technical terms. But at the same time I can understand how they're not always the best in terms of clarity and descriptiveness. We use them because we're used to them, not necessarily because they're the most descriptive terms.

[Vishera]

Just now, Eigenvektor said:

True, they are technical terms. But at the same time I can understand how they're not always the best in terms of clarity and descriptiveness. We use them because we're used to them, not necessarily because they're the most descriptive terms.

In the past we had a system of a master HDD and a slave HDD,those terms are descriptive in this situation since the slave drive works for the master drive.

[Eigenvektor]

7 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

…

Dude, I know what a slave drive is. Read the rest of what I said:

 

Does it mean the drive is being forced against its will to work without pay? <--- This is a rhetorical question. I made it to point out how "slave" is somewhat silly in this context.

Quote

As the Ars Technica article I linked to points out, in a lot of cases changing the wording can actually improve clarity. As a technical person I know what a slave drive is, but I've had quite a few people look at me funny when they heard it the first time.

 

2 minutes ago, Vishera said:

In the past we had a system of a master HDD and a slave HDD,those terms are descriptive in this situation since the slave drive works for the master drive.

Yes. I'm old enough to know that. My first HDDs still needed jumpers in the correct position to work. Other than being a secondary device on the same bus there wasn't really anything that made the second drive on the same IDE channel a "slave".

[pcs3rd]

4 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

True, they are technical terms. But at the same time I can understand how they're not always the best in terms of clarity and descriptiveness. We use them because we're used to them, not necessarily because they're the most descriptive terms.

If it were something like DNS, where it was changed to 'primary' and 'secondary', that makes sense. Changing 'master' and 'slave' terminologies on github doesn't make very much sense, considering that when a new branch is made, it is usually based off of the 'master' branch.

[Eigenvektor]

1 minute ago, pcs3rd said:

If it were something like DNS, where it was changed to 'primary' and 'secondary', that makes sense. Changing 'master' and 'slave' terminologies on github doesn't make very much sense, considering that when a new branch is made, it is usually based off of the 'master' branch.

Yes, primary/secondary makes no sense for git. Read the Ars article: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/openzfs-removed-master-slave-terminology-from-its-codebase/

 

They're suggesting to replace master/slave with more descriptive terms. That doesn't mean primary/secondary is the best fit in all cases, just that it was a good fit for DNS.

 

Creating a branch from the master branch or the main branch is the same difference to me. I've never seen a branch called "slave" though. Our branches are typically called "feature/<whatever>". The master branch contains the latest code, stuff gets developed in feature branches that go back into master once they're done.

[IAmAndre]

I'm not personally for or against this change. I really don't care what they call these officially, plus there's nothing stopping people from using the original terms. However people here arguing that these terms are old.... really? Yes, computers have been created after slavery was abolished so what's your point?

 

I also don't think that this move is meant to change anything, it's more like a move to show support to the black community so I don't see what's wrong with that. I'm not sure if the black people are the ones that are easily triggered after all.

[Jurrunio]

2 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

Yeah, but at the same time what does "slave drive" even mean? Does it mean the drive is being forced against its will to work without pay? As the Ars Technica article I linked to points out, in a lot of cases changing the wording can actually improve clarity. As a technical person I know what a slave drive is, but I've had quite a few people look at me funny when they heard it the first time.

Complex terms exists in many fields, hemorrhage is just bleeding isn't it? But those in the medical field still have to remember it. Why dont we all get rid of all of them when we already have simplier terms for it? That's because old texts use these terms, those who learned from others' previous work (as learning has always been) stick to them after they got used to it. Same for concepts like current travelling in the opposite direction of electrons' net motion, how confusing is that?

 

I'm not saying it's impossible to do (could make programs adapt to different terms) or it doesnt have benefits (easy to learn), but changing names of stuff just creates confusion for those facing them daily while those who campaigned the change dont even use it at all is just a waste of effort.

[DildorTheDecent]

>not changing it to dom/sub

 

It's like these people don't think.

[pcs3rd]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

>not changing it to dom/sub

 

It's like these people don't think.

Actually, that may be a humorous thing to hide away for april fool's...