
GitHub to replace “master” with alternative term to avoid slavery references - AlphaWeaver
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53050955
======
danharaj
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23518123](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23518123)

Previous discussion.

This one won't be any different.

~~~
merricksb
Also:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23500093](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23500093)
(138 points/224 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23519813](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23519813)
(44 points/84 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23522859](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23522859)
(15 points/5 comments)

------
athenot
When I first learned about MySQL replication in 2000, the terminology of
Master/Slave seemed really odd and a bit shocking.

20 years later the terminology is still peculiar to me. Even though it's an
accurate representation of what slavery is, it is a poignant reminder of a
human condition that has sadly not disappeared.

The slave database, as a read-only data store, has no agency and can only
follow the master database. Yet it's the workhorse for all heavy queries,
especially those part of reporting for various execs. It has no value except
as a means to reduce load of the master and to save it's rear end in case of
corruption... yes there are many parallels.

But still, after 2 decades, I'm not sure that this terminology is essential to
the world of relational databases. "Leader/Follower" or "Primary/Replica"
could convey the same data concepts without resorting to a comparison with
slavery. Perhaps a wording update might be in order here.

------
kerkeslager
People of color of HN: is this something you care about, or is this just white
people virtue signalling? I'm not trying to start a debate here, I'm genuinely
asking because I don't know the answer.

------
antishatter
Goofy idea, I work with black developers who told me this had never even
crossed their mind.

~~~
KayL
Kick it out is easy. Get it back it hard.

~~~
antishatter
I don't follow, would you mind elaborating?

------
gnusty_gnurc
I think we should actually remove the word slave from the english language to
prevent all the needless suffering that it creates /s

~~~
gnusty_gnurc
But in all seriousness, if seeing it on github is damaging to the mental
health of descendants of slavery in america, why do we allow the word to exist
at all and where is it acceptable to use? Should words like this be put in
something akin to a biohazard lab?

------
Shihan
I can tell, it never crossed my mind. Never saw anything related to
slavery/race in this and still don't see anything now. In German the word
Meister is also used, for example "Meisterberuf", "Lehrmeister",
"Bäckermeister", "Weltmeister" \- it has nothing to do with slavery, in most
of the cases it just means a person who has mastered something. You have this
to, e.g. "Master of Arts". So now what, should this also be renamed? "Skillful
Person of Arts" maybe? This word bastardization reminds me really of 1984 and
I fear it dumbs us all down.

------
wreck
When building my first computer (with help) in the 90s, setting up hard drives
in master or slave was the first time I learned the definition of slave. I was
6-7 years old and I'm not American

~~~
EForEndeavour
Would you agree from personal experience that calling them something like
"primary" and "secondary" or "1" and "2" would be less confusing to 6-7 year
olds?

~~~
glandium
Except there were 2 IDE buses, a primary and a secondary, each possibly
receiving a master and a slave. So at the very least primary/secondary
wouldn't have worked.

------
mmm_grayons
Really? Git doesn't have any actual references to slavery. Even if it did, is
everyone now disallowed from using such terminology in a benign manner? I'm
not sure calling it "main" makes sense, in any case; anyone who uses git flow
knows it's not the "main" branch where most of the day-to-day development
takes place. As the article points out, this is a reference to "master" as in
a master copy, which is why _there 's no corresponding reference to slave_. If
you download the official git book from the website and control-F for "slave",
do you know what you'll find? _Zero results_!

~~~
musingsole
"root" might be more appropriate than either "main" or "master".

~~~
mmm_grayons
I suppose that makes more sense than main, but it still begs the question:
given that there is no actual slave reference to remove, and discounting the
questionable necessity of removing such a reference were one to exist, what's
the problem here?

~~~
musingsole
Do you work with people who are experts in things you are not? When one of
them raises a concern from the field they're an expert in, you generally must
take it as a given that the issue is real and must be addressed, as the expert
raised it and wouldn't have otherwise. Your role might be to point out how the
presented fixes to the issue might/will cause issues in your field of
expertise, but it'd be pretty unprofessional to question the validity of the
other expert's designated problem.

~~~
mmm_grayons
Sorry, who exactly is the expert here that shouldn't be questioned? While I
generally respect experts' opinions, I also find it reasonable to question
them when they don't pass the smell test.

~~~
musingsole
I can respect your smell test if you can respect that it's highly susceptible
to Dunning-Kruger and the various mishaps of not knowing what you don't know.

~~~
mmm_grayons
You still didn't tell me who these "experts" are, though it seemed you were
referencing several in a prior comment, so I'm unsure how to address that
point. I'd of course respect the opinion of an expert, and I'd recognize that
I have a very good chance of being wrong, but that makes it even more
important to question things. If I'm right, we come to a better conclusion; if
I'm wrong, I learn something.

~~~
musingsole
I didn't answer your question because it's rather obvious. Thanks for the
downvote though!

~~~
mmm_grayons
HN doesn't permit users to downvote replies to their comments, so you can be
sure that wasn't me. Maybe it's obvious to you, but I'm not sure how one
qualifies as an expert in the necessity (or not) of removing the word "master"
from github branches. Would you please elaborate?

