Re: Rename "master" branch to "main"?

[Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>]

On 6/30/20 6:59 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> "Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha" <libc-alpha@sourceware.org> writes:
>> My proposal would be to rename the development and current release branch:
>>
>> * master -> main
>>
>> * release/2.32/master -> release/2.32/main
> 
> I will pose the unpopular opinion that the cost of this change[1] is
> higher than the value of the change.

A group of people have identified problematic language.

Without judgement, consider their request, and accept that what
they tell you is their truth, that the language *is* problematic
to them and that you have the capability to make a change and
be more inclusive to this group.

Changing the branches is easy. Yes it has costs, but those costs
are limited in scope.

Problematic language will *never end* and it will always be our
responsibility to listen to people who are impacted by such
language and then decide if we act or not.

We as a community choose how we act.

I would not go forward with any change that lacks consensus.

I accept that some people will have objections.

Some developers have applied their own metrics and evaluated the
value to be below the threshold for action. My opinion is that such
evaluations are far more complex to make than people would like to
admit, and that such valuations are not required to decide on an
action.

The choice is one of either supporting the inclusion of the group
claiming the language to be problematic or choosing not to be
inclusive of that group and their request.

I find the strongest argument for inaction is made by Adhemerval [1].
That the current optics of this change can draw negative toxic
attention to the project and cause problems for existing developers
who do not deserve such toxicity. My only response to this is that
as a Steward I would not stand for any such toxicity on this list
or in the community and would immediately and decisively act to
remove it. Having said that, there are a lot of digital places I
have no influence or control over.

Feel free to judge me on my past inaction, particularly with
regards to the abort cartouche changes; with my only defense
being that we did act in the end. I do not plan to repeat the same
mistakes.

The name of the branch doesn't matter to me, but it matters to
someone else, and that's what matters. I am willing to exert
effort to change this, just like I'm willing to exert effort
to mentor new people [2].

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.

[1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-July/115628.html
[2] https://twitter.com/jomarnz/status/1278043085151309835
    John Marshall:
    Thanks much and sorry for cheating by asking you here on twitter!
    Had a colleague naysaying POSIX’s random() description because of
    what it said in his stdlib.h, so it’s good to fix even this minor
    documentation.
    https://twitter.com/CarlosODonell/status/1278056404029407235
    Carlos O'Donell:
    I want new contributors to have a positive experience. I can only
    do that if I review and accept patches. Thank you for reaching out.
    It is absolutely not cheating :-)