""" First appearance of "master" in git is in a CVS helper script... Why is that branch called master? Probably because BitKeeper uses "master" for its main branch... But maybe this "master" isn't the same one that's in "master/slave"? """
It then links to a BitKeeper file saying:
"We are then going to modify the file on both the master and slave repository and then merge the work."
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/...
So the number seems much lower than 4000, and mostly the result from a very small group of people. I don't know how many branches there are in GitHub, but this seems like a very very small percentage.
As I sometimes say, I've been Black my entire 50+ years on the planet. I've never met another Black person (or anyone regardless of their race or ethnicity) that felt that robot has “similar baggage” to the word slave.
With a glorious newspeak that greatly improves on the legacy language by simplifying the grammar and adding safety mechanisms to ensure all conversations are safe spaces.
From: Konstantin Ryabitsev
Git doesn't use "master-slave" terminology -- the "master" comes from the concept of having a "master" from which copies (branches) are made:
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_recording
The concept predates the music business and goes back to middle ages when a guild master would create a "master work" or "master piece" that the apprentices could use for study or for imitation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_craftsman