Forcing master to main was a good faith exploit

https://world.hey.com/dhh/forcing-master-to-main-was-a-good-faith-exploit-b21ee30c

by 8f2ab37a-ed6c • 2 years ago

13 8 2 years ago

world.hey.com

nullindividual• 2 years ago

As soon as this word battle was won, it was just on to the next and the next (and the next).

What next, next, and next battles? Is the article only half way through being authored?

lexlash• 2 years ago

“Guillable” says it was maybe only half way edited, at least the version I just read.

kklisura• 2 years ago

Blacklist/whitelist, (variable) name policing?

msie• 2 years ago

Can’t he just be straightforward about it?

amluto• 2 years ago

I can’t really tell what the author’s point is.

I was a bit disappointed that git didn’t end up taking my suggestion: either getting rid of the default name entirely or making it something obviously useless like “unnamed”.

The logic is that neither “master” nor “main” is actually a good name. In the git model, the default branch is a local concept, and it becomes a public property of a fork in most cases when one pushes. If I clone an upstream project, git used to make me a local branch called “master,” which made no sense — my clone isn’t the master copy [0] of anything. But it’s also not the “main” branch of anything other than my local fork.

So why does it need a default name that implies any particular usage at all?

[0] In the sense of an audio master, for example. I’m not sure of the exact etymology here, but I’m not convinced that this usage traces back to master/slave. But this branch is, of course, also not in charge of anything, nor does it have anything resembling a slave.

foxyv• 2 years ago

I could not agree more. "master" and "main" always seem to be the most abused branches in my repos. I keep having developers who aren't familiar with GIT workflow yet, work on it locally and then push directly without a PR. It would be really nice to have GIT refuse to work until developers set their username, email, and default branch (something other than main/master).

ksec• 2 years ago

I guess this is about as close to an apology and admitting he is wrong without saying he is wrong by DHH.

Even though he did not say it, admitting your own mistake is perhaps the greatest thing for getting wiser.

eureka-belief• 2 years ago

Not the most eloquent version of the larger argument against “term cleansing” that I’ve seen. I’ll give my version, via a series of statements:

1) love your neighbor as you love yourself

2) as an individual, try to speak words that reflect your heart

3) language is messy and as it evolves, semantics of innocent words can sometimes collide with the other semantics of the same words (eg black as in blacklist, or black as in the recent terminology for having more melanin)

4) giving a small vocal/powerful minority the power to retroactively redefine and police the semantics of words can be dangerous and should be considered an anti-pattern when trying to change peoples hearts.

5) in conclusion, focus one’s individual efforts mostly on #1 and #2 and ignore the haters on both sides until one day as a society we look back and find this all very silly.

[edit: whitespace]

Forcing master to main was a good faith exploit

Related Stories