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

Fri Jun 19 12:26:45 PDT 2020

As I mentioned on another thread, we also use the term "slave" for the
BuildBot builders.  In the past, I was told this was due to being stuck on
an old version of BuildBot.  Fortunately, there is already work in progress
to update BuildBot to a newer version.  Since that's also going affect all
the build machines, perhaps changing the name of the main branch should
happen simultaneously, when the BuildBots are already being impacted.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:22 PM Chris Tetreault via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> +1 to waiting until git and/or github decide on a new name for the default
> branch. I think there is a compelling reason to change the name of the
> default branch to match community expectations, if for no other reason. If
> we leave it  as “master” after git changes it, then we have to explain that
> we left it as “master” because we could not agree on whether or not
> “master” is non-inclusive. If we pick a new name that is not “master”, but
> does not match the default branch that git or github eventually converge
> on, we still have to explain why we are different. If we change it twice,
> then we have to incur the non-zero cost associated with making the change
> twice, which I feel would be a waste of community resources.
>
>
>
> I do not believe that we need to change it as soon as physically possible.
> I think we can clearly document (say, in the readme on github), that we
> intend to change it once the community converges on a new name. We can
> provide a deadline (say, 6 months) for the community to decide on a new
> default branch name before we make any change. If this deadline passes,
> then we can decide on a new name for the default branch and stick with it
> moving forward.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>    Christopher Tetreault
>
>
>
> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *Keane,
> Erich via llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 11:56 AM
> *To:* Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>; llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> To be clear: I’m concerned about the amount of our infrastructure (as well
> as downstream infrastructure, this would be actually pretty painful for
> both of my downstreams) that the community would have break/need fixing as
> a part of that.  So I want this to happen ONCE.
>
>
>
> I think it is well motivated now, but switching from ‘default’ to ‘main’
> when that becomes the ‘standard’ one seems way less motivated.  So I just
> forsee it being a wart on the project for a very long time.
>
>
>
> That said, I’ve done a bit of research and the git mailing list thread (
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAOAHyQwyXC1Z3v7BZAC+Bq6JBaM7FvBenA-1fcqeDV==apdWDg@mail.gmail.com/#t)
> as well as just news reports about github, and they all seem to be
> converging on ‘main’, though I don’t have good insight into it.
>
>
>
> If ‘we’ as a community (and I think we do?) have a contact at github could
> ping someone and get a reasonably quick confirmation that they are
> switching to ‘main’, it would be appreciated/should guide our decision.
>
>
>
> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *Keane,
> Erich via llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 11:48 AM
> *To:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> My understanding is the biggest concern about the name change is the
> ‘cost’ associated with needing to update each of the individual buildbots
> (and my understanding is that this would be a somewhat non-centralized
> action) configurations.  So I think we’re talking about more than just 1
> person running the script in 10 minutes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 11:44 AM
> *To:* Keane, Erich <erich.keane at intel.com>
> *Cc:* Petr Penzin <penzin.dev at gmail.com>; Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com>;
> llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> I mean, we could change it twice? There are about a hundred scripts out
> there for doing it.
>
>
>
> -eric
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:40 AM Keane, Erich <erich.keane at intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> Do we have any ability to reach out to github (at least?) to see what they
> are going to do?  I’d very much like to avoid being the odd-project-out
> here.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 11:32 AM
> *To:* Keane, Erich <erich.keane at intel.com>
> *Cc:* Petr Penzin <penzin.dev at gmail.com>; Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com>;
> llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> There's really no guarantee that things will shake out the same in near
> term between the projects.
>
>
>
> -eric
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:31 AM Keane, Erich <erich.keane at intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> I’m a bit mixed on this.  While yes, we should change this as soon as is
> practical, it would be a shame to pick something sufficiently different
> from the rest of the world, as that would be anti-inclusive (though in a
> technical way).  It would be REALLY good if we knew what github/git were
> GOING to name theirs and just do that as soon as possible.
>
>
>
> *From:* Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 11:23 AM
> *To:* Petr Penzin <penzin.dev at gmail.com>; Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com
> >
> *Cc:* Keane, Erich <erich.keane at intel.com>; llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> While I appreciate this sentiment we should not block our changes on a
> project over which we have no control. Changing the name and the
> documentation is easy and we should do this today.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> -eric
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:49 AM Petr Penzin via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Git uses `master` branch in quite a few places in its docs and `git init`
> produces a `master` branch. ideally, a change to git should drive all of
> this - that way there would be no confusion.
>
> -Petr
>
>
>
> On 6/19/20 10:45 AM, Keane, Erich via llvm-dev wrote:
>
> I agree with this.  As much as I dislike the name that I believe github
> will choose, we should just do whatever everyone else is doing.
>
>
>
> Note that in addition to the github discussion, there is some extensive
> discussion on the .git mailing list (IIRC) about choosing a new name as
> well.  I hope github waits until that choses a name as well.
>
>
>
> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>
> <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *Philip Reames via
> llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2020 10:39 AM
> *To:* Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> <joker.eph at gmail.com>; llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename
> `master` branch?
>
>
>
> +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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> LLVM Developers mailing list
>
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200619/723041a0/attachment.html>