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

[Keane, Erich via llvm-dev]

If the name of our branch causes anxiety/difficulty for a significant portion of our population, it is literally the least we can do to choose a word that better respects the last few centuries of world history.

That said, I kinda hate 'main' as it is my stand-in for 'how to describe the active branch in an upstream/downstream', so it'll lead to some confusing conversations.  That said, it seems the programming community has already chosen main as the replacement, so I guess I'll have to just figure out that 'Main is on first' a couple times in the next few months.

-----Original Message-----
From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Justin Hibbits via llvm-dev
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 7:28 AM
To: Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Cc: nd <nd at arm.com>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `master` branch?

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 14:45:37 +0100
Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 12:57, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev 
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > I like "dev" as an option here. It's short, and in addition, conveys 
> > the fact that the development happens in that branch.
> > "main" in fine too, although it doesn't have has much semantic 
> > benefit.
> 
> "main" shares the first two letters of "master", and it's nice for TAB 
> completion. :)

I'm still confused why the name needs to be changed.  It's a branch upon which (nearly) all other branches are based, and rebased.  Why is 'master' such a horrible name for it?  There are no negative connotations with a branch name.  Anyone who reads more into it, the problem is on them and them alone.

- Justin
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev