Comment on If "Master/Slave" terminology in computing sounds bad now, why not change it to "Dom/Sub"?

• SpaceCadet@feddit.nl ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Is it not the main working branch

  No it is not. On large distributed projects for which git was designed, you typically don’t directly work on main/master but you create a working branch to do your changes, and when they are ready you merge them to main/master.

  There are many types of git workflows, but main/master usually contains the code that is deployed to production or the latest stable release and not some work in progress.

  When you start a new project, do you open a new branch or create a whole new repository?

  You have to define “project” for that.

  • Is your project a change to existing code -> new branch, merge to main/master when done
  • Is your project something new that stands entirely on its own? -> new repository

  source

  • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Ah we develop the same way. There’s testing then staging then prod is final review and is then finally merged to Main after documentation. Main branch is protected and merges are gated by review. There’s no need for master terminology there.

    source

    • SpaceCadet@feddit.nl ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      There’s no need for master terminology there

      Nobody said there is a need, you could call it foo or bar and it would still work. It just that master more accurately describes what it is. Main for example does not describe a derivative relationship, master does.

      Also, master in this context is totally unrelated to slavery so I could also just as easily say that there was no need to replace the existing terminology either. It doesn’t solve any real world problems of historic or currently existing slavery, and it doesn’t make anyone’s life better. The only reasons why it was done were appeasement and virtue signalling.

      source

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Sure, so if there’s no need for any certain terminology outside of an agreed upon definition what does it matter if it’s called master or main or unicorn farts? Why care about Master at all?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Omniraptor@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Wait huge? Shouldn’t Prod be the last place any changes go ?

      source

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        [deleted]

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • PlexSheep@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    In fact, many projects forbid pushing to master entirely and only allow reviewed merging to the master. Then, every time the master changes, a new release of the software is made (either manually or automatically with CI/CD)

    source
• orrk@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  you don’t work on main/master, you make a branch to work in, and then merge your changes back into master/main

  source

  • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Also with git, respectfully, I can do whatever the fuck I want. That’s the point of git. If I want to branch my way down to a stack overflow due to running out of free memory my system will very happily let me do that.

    source