Instead of either, it's good to have a more descriptive primary branch:
git checkout -b dontwritetothisbranchdirectlyyougottaopenaprfirstandhaveitreviewedandapprovedandthenpasstheautomatictests
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
355 points (91.2% liked)
Programmer Humor
32410 readers
581 users here now
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
- Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
- No NSFW content.
- Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Git checkout -b neverpushtothisbranchthismeansyou
git co -b nevergonnagiveyouupnevergonnaletyoudown
Git checkout -b branchprotectiononlyworksifyouarenotsetupwithadminprivilegesontherepoingithubthismeansyouhowardgodammit
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Still shorter than a java class name.
Try not to make memes that imply you’re not anti-slavery.
I‘m anti-slavery but that’s just not the reason I use main as default branch
yup same. I hate slavery just like anyone else but fail to see how naming a branch master has to do anything with it. Next are they gonna claim that master's degree is pro slavery or something
Bachelor's degree means you're not married, so obviously an incel.
Don't give the fucking outrage vampires any ideas.
load more comments
(13 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use main because, although I never heard of anybody actually getting offended by master, it costs me nothing to use main instead. Also it looks prettier and seems to be the new convention ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No disrespect, but asking everyone to remove words from the English language because they may offend a small group of oversensitive people is one of the most frustrating social initiatives of our time. "Master" makes sense for the job and unless we're also putting "Slave" and "Cotton" on the dictionary chopping block, the arguement will always seem arbitrary to me.
unless we're also putting "Slave" and "Cotton" on the dictionary chopping block
Aren't we though? At least when it comes to tech, Master-Slave terminology has been largely deprecated in favor of other terms.
The only reason you think "master" makes sense is because you're used to it. It's actually quite a weird connection to make, if you aren't used to it. "Main" is much more straight forward. And nobody is really demanding people stop using "master", so far as I am aware, it's just that people are making that choice themselves.
I vote for naming this branch "mommy", since all other branches are it's offspring, and related to it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use main as my default branch because it's what Git has been defaulting to for some time now
Git's still master by default; github uses main for new repositories.
You mean github.
I use master because I'm nostalgic. If it matters that much, though, I'll start using trunk (like we used to back in the days of SVN).
Don't speak the name of that horror!
At least it was better than CVS
load more comments
(8 replies)
Master sounded so much cooler man
Like yeah I'm a master of linux
Literally no connotation to slavery when the word slave isn't even used in the git terminology
load more comments
(2 replies)
Oh I don’t give a single fuck about the discussion, it’s technology, not politics. I am more upset that my company has some legacy repositories with master and the newer ones with a main branch. So everytime I want to create a MR with push options via command line I need to change main to master or visa versa.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I also think it's more descriptive. Just like blocklist and allowlist.
Oh, how upset I was by that decision. I still call out GitHub online every now and then thanking them for solving slavery by messing up my deployment scripts and development environments.
load more comments
(8 replies)
It speaks to the deep rooted whiteness of the industry that such a common-sense change is treated as completely bullshit even to this day.
It speaks to deep rooted butthurtness of USA boomers and constant need to enforce their stupid ass rules to others. It's not racist, neither are blacklist or whitelist.
Even ignoring the question of racism, they are still stupid names.
Imagine teaching a child about this and it asks: Why is white allowed and black not? The only answer is, because it is like this for a long time. If we name them allowlist and denylist, it is obvious to all English speaking people. Shouldn't we strive for descriptive names in programming?
However, if you use names whitelist an blacklist, you need to make the implicit connection white-positive black-negative. Yes obviously this does not make you racist if you do this in programming. But is it good?
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I find it funny how many ppl complained about it when it came up. Now it is the default on github and other code forges. And now one cares anymore if it is master or main.
It was never about the name itself, but about breaking a convention for extremely dubious reasons.
On the plus side, forcing people to support alternative branch names surely has led to better software support for a core Git feature.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
Because its a non issue to developers.
It was only a hand wringing thing by internet bloggers.
I use master because when I do 'git init .' I get a master branch and I am lazy enough to not rename it. As for typing it later on.. . Well zsh does that for me
Master gang
When you're pro slavery but only when it's with consenting adults.
Main in the workplace, master in the bedroom.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›