It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Take a breath dude

    Can you not please with the condescending language? Maybe you’re the one who should take a breath and read my post calmly. Anyway, the guy above me asked, I gave an answer to cover all the bases.

    The default branch name of git isn’t that important to me either, I’ll manage with main or master. But at the same time it does irk me especially since this kind of language policing has become an industry wide trend, and it’s just a stupid thing done for stupid reasons. Am I still allowed to express why I find it stupid?

    it’s trivial to change

    It isn’t as trivial as you make it out. I’ve already encountered repos where there was both a main and a master branch, both with different commits, because some developer got confused, and it was a nice mess to untangle. But hey, let’s change some more stuff around for no good reason.

    If there’s any chance it helps maintain a hostile workplace/industry

    I can think of a lot of things that contribute to a hostile workplace, but the default branch name of git? Seriously? Even the people who pushed for this don’t actually believe that themselves.