So, there's a big issue with "master/slave" terminology in computer shit and I'm 100% for doing away with that.
But GitHub is changing the default branch from "master" to "main" and a lot of people use GitHub for git.
So, I thought I was missing something. I assumed the "master" branch referred just referred to some central branch, and that this was a wholly pointless and misguided change, but apparently it's taken from git's great grandparent bitkeeper, which does use the problematic master/slave terminology. (source: https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask#L223 )
I was wondering what y'all think? Usually I'm all on board with changing the names of things at the chagrin of Old Tech People, but even this one seems iffy to me? Even disregarding that GitHub is owned by Microsoft, I don't think I've ever heard anyone consider this an issue, even among the social justice techy side of things.
A lot of people are saying this will break their automation but I don't think GitHub's going to retroactively change the titles of branches in existing repositories, but also I don't use any automation that assumes the existence of a main branch titled "master"
So I was wondering what y'all thought here