emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: elpa.git and `new-master`


From: Joost Kremers
Subject: Re: elpa.git and `new-master`
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:29:28 +0100
User-agent: mu4e 1.5.7; emacs 27.1.50

On Wed, Dec 16 2020, Jean Louis wrote:
> * Boruch Baum <boruch_baum@gmx.com> [2020-12-16 09:48]:
>> The example creates a new branch 'main' but you could just as well just
>> rename the master branch to main:
>> 
>>   git branch -m master main
>
> There is no need to remain the branch just because some users will not
> understand that one word may have several different meanings. One does
> not change the world and reality to accommodate lack of understanding
> of subset of people. We need rich meanings and rich understandings,
> not less rich meanings and less understandings.

The problem is that words not only have meanings but also connotations. And
whether you like it or not, the word 'master' evokes the word 'slave' and
everything associated with it. Perhaps the effect is stronger in English than in
other languages, I don't know. The effect is probably stronger in computer
contexts because of the ubiquity of so-called "master-slave" architectures. And
the effect is likely stronger for some people than for others. But the effect 
exists.

So please do not assume that people who advocate switching to the term "main" do
not understand that words have different meanings. The point is that words can
evoke sentiments even in contexts where their intended meaning wouldn't give
rise to those sentiments.

Whether that warrants changing the term "master branch" to "main branch" is
certainly worth discussing, but the discussion cannot be decided on the
basis of the dictionary meaning of "master", nor on its etymology. The
discussion should centre around the question whether the benefits outweigh the
costs.

The costs in this case are, AFAIU, fairly low. Renaming a branch in Git, or
creating a new branch, is easy and Git itself doesn't ascribe any special 
meaning
to the branch name "master". At most it would be a one-time inconvenience for
people regularly pulling from the main repo. (As far as I understand. I'm really
not a Git expert.)

I cannot comment on the benefits. I do not know how offensive the term "master"
in Git is to those whose ancestors were enslaved and who themselves suffer from 
the
effects of racism in society. We should not, however, preempt the discussion by
pointing to the dictionary meaning of the word "master", implying that those who
feel offended by the term have no reason to feel that way.


-- 
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]