Rename "master" branch to "main"?

DJ Delorie dj@redhat.com
Tue Jun 30 22:59:31 GMT 2020


"Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha" <libc-alpha@sourceware.org> writes:
> My proposal would be to rename the development and current release branch:
>
> * master -> main
>
> * release/2.32/master -> release/2.32/main

I will pose the unpopular opinion that the cost of this change[1] is
higher than the value of the change.  The word "master" has many
meanings, and even in this case the context (and thus meaning) has
changed over time.  Since we use "master" in the adjective case (master
branch), and don't use the word "slave" anywhere (we use
master/release), IMHO this is a case where we've gone too far down the
slippery slope and are making a change for the sake of looking good and
not for the sake of actually improving anything.  Our efforts to
*actually* be inclusive have been far more useful and meaningful than
any efforts to just *appear* inclusive, and we should continue to apply
our efforts in that manner, such as responding more timely to new people
on the mailing list and IRC, or reviewing patches.

If we want to rename the master branch to a more meaningful name, there
are far more meaningful choices than "main".  "Trunk" goes with the
"branch" metaphor.  How about "development"?  We have an opportunity to
pick something precise and obvious, let's not waste it by blindly
following others.

[1] scripts, docs, training, everyone's existing git repos, confusion, etc



More information about the Libc-alpha mailing list