this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
954 points (96.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

20703 readers
2023 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eyekaytee@aussie.zone 81 points 1 week ago (1 children)

reverting main back to master

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah...this one is sadly on brand

[–] undefinedValue@programming.dev 45 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Sadly? Master branch never implied the existence of a slave branch. It was one of the dumbest pieces of woke incursion into tech.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

It was kind of pointless, but at least it made software work with custom default branches.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yes exactly. It’s a reference to the recording industry’s practice of calling the final version of an album the “master” which gets sent for duplication.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In alignment with this, we should not replace the master branch with the main branch, we should replace it with the gold branch.

Every time a PR gets approval and it’s time to merge, I could declare that the code has “gone gold” and I am not doing that right now!

[–] ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

Merged -> gone gold

Deployed -> gone platinum

Gone a week without crashing production -> triple platinum

[–] vulpivia@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's just not true. It originally came from Bitkeeper's terminology, which had a master branch and slave branches.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not according to pasky, the git contributor who picked the names.

[–] vulpivia@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, he doesn't seem so sure about it himself. From the same link:

(But as noted in a separate thread, it is possible it stems from bitkeeper's master/slave terminology. I hoped to do some historical research but health emergency in my family delayed that.)

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

He also said:

the impression words form in the reader is more important than their intent

He didn’t intend for the master/slave connotation. He intended for the recording master connotation. Either way, he regrets using the word master and he’s supportive of the change.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

But why even? There's no risk to changing it and some risk to keeping it. That's the reason for the push to change it. Keeping something just because it's tradition isn't a good idea outside ceremonies.

[–] shortrounddev@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's the principle of letting uneducated people dictate what words are acceptable to us

[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

letting uneducated people

More like overeducated people

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

overeducated people who can't see that "master" has multiple meanings.

[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It’s like when you write a regex for a specific case, that then gets applied everywhere.

Why can you get a Master in Decolonization Studies at a university?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

What makes you think they're uneducated?

[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

There is definitely a risk in changing it. Many automation systems that assume there is a master branch needed to be changed. Something that's trivial yes but changing a perfectly running system is always a potential risk.

Also stuff like tutorials and documentation become outdated.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If they can't change what's essentially a variable name without issues then should they be doing the job?

pray tell me how would you change the name in every script of an automation system that refers to master? Remember, you have to justify the time and cost to your manager or director!

[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

In assessing risk assume everyone is a bumbling idiot. For we all have moments of great stupidity.

[–] undefinedValue@programming.dev 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don’t accept that because everyone’s doing it or “group-think” are valid excuses do jump on a trend. Things like this maybe don’t seem like a big deal for you but for those that hate this culture it’s just one more example of a dumb change being shoved down their throats. This could also be the straw that breaks the camels back.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They have a reason. You just don't like it.

They do, and you’re right. Morality policing and prigs are not my thing.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago

Yeah agreed. Just another piece of white devs acting like they knew better for everyone.

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

For this political correctness you get trunk.