Yeah, and it was misguided and irrelevant all the same. People who actually use Git understand that "master" is a metaphor, just like people who are concerned about historical views being represented understand that "decolonization" is also a metaphor for this due dilligence.

Context is everything. You're not gonna be killed by Unix command, enslaved by Github, and the land you own is not going to be confiscated by people who are writing an encyclopedia.

The difference is that "master" doesn't actually imply the existence of slaves in English, while "decolonization" does literally imply that there is some sort of colonialism that is being undone.

That's irrelevant unless you assume that they use the word "decolonization" in a bad faith. I argue they don't, and so it's a non-issue (people are being offended for no reason).

But IIRC, the first time I encountered the word "master" in computing, it was in the context of serial link data transfer, and there was a "slave".

It's irrelevant that the usage of a word, by the word's very construction, favors the formation of false beliefs, so long as there are good intentions behind it?

The fact that a word can be used in the context of slavery doesn't mean the word always and everywhere carries the taint of slavery. What could possibly limit the reach of such a principle? Can I talk about how I like cotton shirts better than other fabrics, when the mere mention of cotton might bring some people back to an uncomfortable place?

> People who actually use Git understand that "master" is a metaphor

I don’t think thats actually true. I think everyone knew the etymology was not slave owners. Which is the problem - its fighting a manufactured battle. Creating “systemic racism” out of thin air.