main > master

Because it's shorter

Checkmate fascists

m because it's shorter and can be used as a substitute for both.

mom is larger and carries more weight

@Demolishun and yo momma so <insert joke>

(Joke ideas: mono repos, high traffic merge branches)

@melezorus34

I started a repo for these kinds of jokes. But it devolved into random shit:

https://github.com/Demolishun/...

@Demolishun yupp, random it is.

Main is the entry point of the program or main loop if you will.

Master is the master copy, the golden standard that can be released at any time.

Thinking a poodle is better than a labradoodle. Is fascism. Basically fascism starts with ">" in the same species.

3 different things let's use them context appropriately.

@hjk101 good reasoning, too bad it wasn't used when transitioning to main

Everybody that disagrees with me is a facist REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

@12bitfloat SSSSESS PUFFS REESES PUFFS
EAT EM UP
EAT EM UP
EAT EM UP

@zlice Very true! Wanted to illustrate it without putting any politics in there (using any example with humans did that unfortunately).
In my mind there is no room for politics in the dev scene. This is how this out of context master replacement came to be anyway.

tell me how you should go to school to get your "mains degree" because it is shorter

*changing master to main*

We did it guys! We’ve defeated racism!

use 'prod'
same length,
intent clear

Checkmate fascists

Is m*ster a bad word?

@wackOverflow in this generation? Yes.

You know what's fucked up?
Master branches, an intangible, digital item, were renamed to main, because the word reminded people of slavery.

Scrum masters, people who tell devs what to do, apparently don't remind anyone of slavery.

Because the only actual enemy is discourse about the way decisions are made.

All bullshit aside, why isn't the main branch just called "release"? Typically that's what the top-level branch is anyways, and if it's not, then name it appropriately.

Maybe this is just a wake-up lesson in naming your branches.

I couldn't care less about branch names.
My team is using develop, and it works just as well

Boss Branch. Short it to Boob. 🍈🍈

Jokes aside, prod or release make more sense. Or even Boss itself.

@lbfalvy

scrum mains.

how about `scrum mens`?

nvm. it becoms femini... something.

I mean, I'd agree with "release" but we're already using the "release" branch name for branches that are to be merged into "master"... So the way I'm used to seeing it is "release branch gets removed once the release is done and everything is in the new master branch, which is, in fact, the master branch of the repository.

I mean "master" never meant the master/slave relationship... in the case of repositories we're not talking about controlling branches and subservient branches, we're talking about branching... and master branch is the main branch, just like a masters bedroom is the main bedroom of the house. But alas, sensitive people can't be bothered to learn a language, they just recognize top-level patterns and that's enough to trigger them I guess

@NoMad I would commit to that branch

@useVim Scrum supreme leaders
Scrum pimps
Scrum lords

The devs must be referred to as scrum sluts.

@wackOverflow depends if you're into bdsm or not

@lbfalvy on another note, is being reminded of slavery really a bad idea? Even when I don't consider taking out words out of their context.

If being reminded of slavery's existence is not a good example of the atrocities humanity is capable of, in the goal of not repeating it, well I guess we are all screwed.

Nice bait thread

@Earu He is master baiter.

@PepeTheFrog people have complicated emotional relationships to slavery. One should not have to be comfortable with the thought in order to work with software.

That's the general idea behind trigger warnings and discreet language, but as I said, this is a very obviously false case of it.