git push master --forceI renamed my master branch
slaveowner. To make it more clear.It is software, my friends. It’s not a tribe of people.
You could do that, but I could argue that master/slave nomenclature isnt a good scheme for this anyway, since it doesn’t control any other branches. Unlike master and slave drives from the olden days.
By all means go ahead and keep your naming schemes. It’s your own stuff that after all, that for some reason you felt the need to tell everyone about. However, I might recommend trying to move past it seeing as language has an impact on how people think, and being edgy doesn’t exactly have a good track record of producing the best people.
There are no slave branches like there are no slave recordings.
I always assumed the name was more of a reference to audio Master Recordings.
It’s the original tapes or whatever that all copies are derived from. It’s also where the term “remastering” comes from, as in “we went in and rebuilt a new master from the individual tracks, and this is the new master now”, versus just making another copy of the master for a re-release.
Not gonna lie, the master branch thing has been perceived as problematic but I don’t typically see an issue with it. It’s similar to master bedroom or bath.
Kind of fucked up name origin, butI don’t think anyone’s really making a fuss about it.Whatever the fuck you’re doing though feels like some gross, racist fantasy. It’s really weird, dude. If you think that’s funny you might need to go talk to some real people or touch grass.
Wtf are you talking about? It doesn’t have a fucked up name origin at all. It was named “master” as in “master recording”, like in music production. Proof: https://x.com/xpasky/status/1271477451756056577.
Master/slave concepts were never a thing in git. The whole renaming thing was really fucking stupid. Caused plenty of breakage of scripts and tools for absolutely no good reason whatsoever.
it has always bothered me that checkout is overloaded: it can switch branches or discard pending changes in an unrecoverable way.
so, PSA, you can replicate the safe part of checkout with
git switchand the unsafe withgit restore.I agree, I wonder why they decided to design it that way in the first place.
In both cases, checkout updates your working tree (by checking out either all or just some files from a commit), just when you’re switching branches it moves your HEAD pointer too
