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

[Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev]

Speaking only for myself here...

> -----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 10:59 AM
> To: Keane, Erich via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `master`
> branch?
> 
> On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 14:46:19 +0000
> "Keane, Erich via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Honestly, if the name of a branch causes anxiety/difficulty, that's an
> issue on that population.

Much as I hate to use this sort of language, that statement appears to
be blaming the victim for not getting over it and progressing to a
connotation-free reading of language.  But language is never free of
connotations, even if you and I don't see those connotations.

I'm not seeing the change as a huge inconvenience, and this argument is
not much different than the head-butting over camelCase vs CamelCase.
Some people care deeply, others see little value in the change so why
bother; IMO it makes the people who care deeply happier, and it doesn't
particularly interfere with my work or cost me more than a bit of one
time adaptation.  Thus overall it is a plus for the community.

If anyone's keeping track of the voting:
+1 for "dev" (contrasts with "release")
+1 for "trunk" (historical and consistent with the branch metaphor)
-1 for "main"
--paulr