newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Corinna Vinschen]

Hey folks,

In the light of recent discussions, and following other projects already
having done this step, we changed the name of the "master" branch in
the newlib-cygwin.git upstream repository to "main".

If you fetched from upstream in the last two days, you might already
have noticed that an "origin/main" branch suddenly showed up, but your
"master" branch still worked as before.

The reason is that we also added a symbolic reference upstream, so that
"origin/master" points to "origin/main".  Both "branches" are now
constantly kept in sync upstream.

Therefore, you can continue your work on "master" without disruption,
if you prefer to do so.

However, on the client side, the "master" and "main" branches are
treated as two distinct branches.  If you work on your local "main"
clone and commit a patch, it's not keeping your local "master" branch in
sync.  After pushing your change upstream, though, the upstream idea of
"main" and "master" is, again, the same.  After fetching from upstream,
the patch will show up in both tracking branches, "origin/main" as well
as "origin/master", so pulling on both local branches will show the same
tree.

Having said that.  Ideally you only use one of the branches locally
to avoid any confusion:

- If you prefer to work in "master", just continue to do so and don't
  create a local "main" branch tracking "origin/main".

- If you prefer to work in "main", checkout "origin/main" as "main" and
  delete your local "master" branch.


Have fun,
Corinna

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Jan 13 12:55, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Hey folks,
> 
> In the light of recent discussions, and following other projects already
> having done this step, we changed the name of the "master" branch in
> the newlib-cygwin.git upstream repository to "main".
> 
> If you fetched from upstream in the last two days, you might already
> have noticed that an "origin/main" branch suddenly showed up, but your
> "master" branch still worked as before.
> 
> The reason is that we also added a symbolic reference upstream, so that
> "origin/master" points to "origin/main".  Both "branches" are now
> constantly kept in sync upstream.
> 
> Therefore, you can continue your work on "master" without disruption,
> if you prefer to do so.
> 
> However, on the client side, the "master" and "main" branches are
> treated as two distinct branches.  If you work on your local "main"
> clone and commit a patch, it's not keeping your local "master" branch in
> sync.  After pushing your change upstream, though, the upstream idea of
> "main" and "master" is, again, the same.  After fetching from upstream,
> the patch will show up in both tracking branches, "origin/main" as well
> as "origin/master", so pulling on both local branches will show the same
> tree.
> 
> Having said that.  Ideally you only use one of the branches locally
> to avoid any confusion:
> 
> - If you prefer to work in "master", just continue to do so and don't
>   create a local "main" branch tracking "origin/main".
> 
> - If you prefer to work in "main", checkout "origin/main" as "main" and
>   delete your local "master" branch.

Oh, and, btw., if you clone the newlib-cygwin.git repo anew, you
will by default get a local "main" branch tracking "origin/main".


Corinna

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Sam Edge]

On 13/01/2023 11:55, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
 > Hey folks,
 >
 > In the light of recent discussions, and following other projects already
 > having done this step, we changed the name of the "master" branch in
 > the newlib-cygwin.git upstream repository to "main".
 >
 > If you fetched from upstream in the last two days, you might already
 > have noticed that an "origin/main" branch suddenly showed up, but your
 > "master" branch still worked as before.
 >
 > The reason is that we also added a symbolic reference upstream, so that
 > "origin/master" points to "origin/main".  Both "branches" are now
 > constantly kept in sync upstream.
 >
 > Therefore, you can continue your work on "master" without disruption,
 > if you prefer to do so.
 >
 > However, on the client side, the "master" and "main" branches are
 > treated as two distinct branches.  If you work on your local "main"
 > clone and commit a patch, it's not keeping your local "master" branch in
 > sync.  After pushing your change upstream, though, the upstream idea of
 > "main" and "master" is, again, the same.  After fetching from upstream,
 > the patch will show up in both tracking branches, "origin/main" as well
 > as "origin/master", so pulling on both local branches will show the same
 > tree.
 >
 > Having said that.  Ideally you only use one of the branches locally
 > to avoid any confusion:
 >
 > - If you prefer to work in "master", just continue to do so and don't
 >   create a local "main" branch tracking "origin/main".
 >
 > - If you prefer to work in "main", checkout "origin/main" as "main" and
 >   delete your local "master" branch.
 >
 >
 > Have fun,
 > Corinna
 >
 >

While I can understand sensitivity over the word 'slave' this is taking 
things
too far in my opinion. I just conducted a quick poll of my Afro-Caribbean &
other non-Caucasian workmates who all express the same sentiment.

There is only one use case that relates to slavery. There are dozens that do
not. Are we supposed to stop using all of them? The git usage is not to 
do with
master/slave relationship anyway.

See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master, for example:-

* "In Casablanca, I am the master of my own fate."
* "She is a master carpenter."
* "He is a master of the violin."
* "The professor is the master of the college."
* "The maid has a master key to all the hotel rooms."

People are enduring slavery all over the world right now - here in the 
UK & USA
as well as elsewhere. Not using the words does not stop it happening.

Well, it's a fait accompli on the Cygwin repos.

</rant>

-- 
Sam Edge

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Jan 13 14:20, Sam Edge via Cygwin wrote:
> On 13/01/2023 11:55, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > In the light of recent discussions, and following other projects already
> > having done this step, we changed the name of the "master" branch in
> > the newlib-cygwin.git upstream repository to "main".
> >
> > If you fetched from upstream in the last two days, you might already
> > have noticed that an "origin/main" branch suddenly showed up, but your
> > "master" branch still worked as before.
> >
> > The reason is that we also added a symbolic reference upstream, so that
> > "origin/master" points to "origin/main".  Both "branches" are now
> > constantly kept in sync upstream.
> >
> > Therefore, you can continue your work on "master" without disruption,
> > if you prefer to do so.
> >
> > However, on the client side, the "master" and "main" branches are
> > treated as two distinct branches.  If you work on your local "main"
> > clone and commit a patch, it's not keeping your local "master" branch in
> > sync.  After pushing your change upstream, though, the upstream idea of
> > "main" and "master" is, again, the same.  After fetching from upstream,
> > the patch will show up in both tracking branches, "origin/main" as well
> > as "origin/master", so pulling on both local branches will show the same
> > tree.
> >
> > Having said that.  Ideally you only use one of the branches locally
> > to avoid any confusion:
> >
> > - If you prefer to work in "master", just continue to do so and don't
> >   create a local "main" branch tracking "origin/main".
> >
> > - If you prefer to work in "main", checkout "origin/main" as "main" and
> >   delete your local "master" branch.
> >
> >
> > Have fun,
> > Corinna
> >
> >
> 
> While I can understand sensitivity over the word 'slave' this is taking
> things
> too far in my opinion. I just conducted a quick poll of my Afro-Caribbean &
> other non-Caucasian workmates who all express the same sentiment.
> [...]
> Well, it's a fait accompli on the Cygwin repos.

That's why we chose the symbolic ref solution.  You can use both in
future, whichever you like more.


Corinna

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 29 bytes --]

thanks for doing this!
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Adam Dinwoodie]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Mike Frysinger via Cygwin wrote:
> thanks for doing this!
> -mike

Seconded!  This clearly isn't going to solve racism in a single step,
but making our community that bit more welcoming -- particularly when
the cost of the change is essentially zero -- has to be a positive move.

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Dave McGuire]

On 1/13/23 14:57, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Mike Frysinger via Cygwin wrote:
>> thanks for doing this!
>> -mike
> 
> Seconded!  This clearly isn't going to solve racism in a single step,
> but making our community that bit more welcoming -- particularly when
> the cost of the change is essentially zero -- has to be a positive move.

   You guys have GOT to be kidding me.

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

Re: newlib-cygwin.git repository: Switching "master" to "main"

[Eliot Moss]

On 1/14/2023 7:16 AM, Dave McGuire via Cygwin wrote:
> On 1/13/23 14:57, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Mike Frysinger via Cygwin wrote:
>>> thanks for doing this!
>>> -mike
>>
>> Seconded!  This clearly isn't going to solve racism in a single step,
>> but making our community that bit more welcoming -- particularly when
>> the cost of the change is essentially zero -- has to be a positive move.
> 
>    You guys have GOT to be kidding me.

Umm, no.  For example, the gem5 project (a computer architecture simulator
including estimated timing) has deprecated master/slave terminology for
port protocols.

The way I would put it is this: We swim in a sea of racism mostly not
realizing it, just as we move in air usually without thinking about it.
This is true for all people in our culture, no matter their ethnicity.
This small change make us more conscious of what is usually unconscious
or subconscious, and it does not cost us much to do it.

Regards - Eliot Moss