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

[Philip Reames via llvm-dev]

+1 to the notion of changing the branch name in general.

However, I think there's a practical aspect which needs considered.  
Currently, "master" is the defacto convention used across many, many 
projects.  There's currently a lot of conversation going on across many 
projects about naming.  I think it's really important that rather than 
just picking something that we wait and see what the new convention is, 
and adopt that.  I've seen reporting that GitHub is considering changing 
the default name for new projects.  If that does end up happening - I 
hope it does - I think we should use whatever name they pick.  
Convention is critical for ease of use of new contributors.

Philip

p.s. There's a bunch of other terminology in use which is potentially 
problematic, but I'm intentionally restricting my response to this one.  
I think each deserves discussion on it's own merits.

On 6/19/20 2:48 AM, 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200619/782698ef/attachment.html>