[llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `master` branch?

[Kai Nacke via llvm-dev]

+1

Language shapes how we observe reality, so this is right step to do.

Best regards,
Kai

On 19.06.2020 11:48, Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> When we moved to GitHub a few months ago, we used without more 
> consideration the "master" convention to name our development branch. On 
> SVN it used to be just "trunk".
> This naming is unfortunate 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1> as 
> it can hurt some contributors 
> <https://dev.to/afrodevgirl/replacing-master-with-main-in-github-2fjf>, 
> and there is really no technical advantage that I know of to favor this 
> convention over another.
> 
> I am perfectly aware that `master` has other significations than the 
> master/slave meaning, and I personally never made this association in 
> the past. However I'm also able to recognize that I'm privileged here, 
> and that not everyone is in the same position.
> 
> As we intend to be an inclusive community, I propose that we change the 
> name of our development branch and that we adopt instead a more neutral 
> terminology for the LLVM monorepo. Possible names are "dev", "trunk", 
> "main", "default", ...
> 
> We need to plan a transition as all the bots will need to be updated to 
> track this new branch instead, but these are minor technical details, 
> nothing compared to the SVN->Git migration we went through.
> 
> Since I'm on this topic, we should also likely look into the pervasive 
> use of whitelist/blacklist in the project.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -- 
> Mehdi
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>