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

[Fangrui Song via llvm-dev]

On 2020-06-19, Justin Hibbits via llvm-dev wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:38:02 +0100
>Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 16:43, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > 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"
>>
>> Hey! At least one +1 for "main" from me!
>>
>> Also, on -1 for "trunk" from Arm.
>>
>> I may have missed some, too.
>>
>> I agree with Chris we should wait for Github, mostly because that
>> would be looking over a much wider scope and will be choosing
>> something that more people are happy with.
>>
>> Moreover, more people will use the Github name as their main branch
>> and will be "surprised" why ours is different and we'll have to
>> explain.
>>
>> Least surprise principle is always good.
>
>This is a reason I can support... least surprise, consistent with other
>projects on the platform.  However I may disagree with the reasoning
>behind GitHub's changing (which reeks of arrogance on their part),
>maintaining consistency of this project for users of other projects on
>the platform is respectable and acceptable.
>
>- Justin

I agree that we should just wait for Github.

* Paul Robinson
>> 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

+1 for dev
+1 for trunk



The majority of people replying here seem to in favor of migrating off
from 'master'. I still wanted to share the origin of 'master copy' and an
opinion from the other side

http://antirez.com/news/122