Someone else linked this historical document to show that the words in Git has indeed to do with a master-slave relationship: https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/H...

But as I said elsewhere, I do not care about that a lot. However, I do think those words are bad for other reasons because they do not illustrate the _actual_ role and relationships of branches in a VCS in a _good way_. If the master branch is not actually ruling over other branches, then it should be named something else, like "primary" as far as I am concerned.

Language is in constant flux. If a word has a remote historical connection to master/slave in a precursor project people nowadays don't even know, and people invent a "folk etymology" comparing it to a master record, do you really gain anything worthwhile from insisting on the history?

PS: about the role in git: I don't feel that strongly about it, but I think master is somewhat more descriptive. The master branch contains the most up-to-date version of the source code, so e.g. if I'm working on a feature branch and a colleague pushes a bug fix that affects me into master, I need to merge/rebase to get the latest changes into my feature branch. So, while the master branch doesn't "rule" the feature branches, there is still the implication that changes to master should find there way into the feature branches at some point, which I think main doesn't convey that clearly.

> Except the master branch has nothing to do with slavery.

It did, it originated from Bitkeeper that literally used to the term "slave" to refer to non-master branches.

> It's more like 'master bedroom.'

This is even more ridiculous. Where do you think that term came from? What made that a master bedroom in comparison to the other bedrooms? Could it be because that was the one the master was sleeping in, in comparison to the ones slaves were sleeping in?

There are many more kinds of masters than just owners of slaves. The word "master bedroom" only appeared in 1920, it has absolutely nothing to do with slavery.

No, that's just one of those made-up lies people repeat often enough online to become "true" because it's the top search result and because it makes them feel good about continuing to use that term.

Here it is for example in an Australian newspaper ad from 1844: https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/31742822

> TO LET, Westmoeath Cottage and Garden, situated near to Cook's River, only three miles from the city. the cottage contains parlour and drawing room,and four large bed rooms ; detached kitchen, bakehouse, landry, storeroom, four stall stable and double coach-house, servants' rooms neatly fitted up, together with hay-loft and granary, school house and master's bed-room. A cottage containing four separate rooms for overseer and workmen ; two excellent wells of water on the premises, about six acres of garden neatly laid out and planted with the best vines and fruit trees, 'This property is fit for a family of the first respectability.

Or here it is in London-based The Examiner from 1845: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/The_Exam... (page 523, middle row, a couple of lines below the "Police" headline)

I'm sure I could find more examples, but I think two will sufface.

You couldn't own slaves in London in 1845, and in any case the name derives from the "Master of the household", so if you want to be mad about it, you should call it sexist, not racist. Or you could just be chill, stretch the meaning a bit and say the couple together are the masters of the household. But, now I'm curious: Where do you draw the line? You don't like git master branches and master bedrooms, but what about other uses? You can have a master key, master record, master a skill, create a masterwork, be a master to an apprentice, join the toastmasters, be a master of ceremonies at a formal event, you can dress up for comic con as Master Yoda, Master Chief, or Dumbledore (the Headmaster of Hogwarts), you can be a Master Chief in the US Navy, be the dungeon master for a game of D&D, get a Masters' Degree and so on. Which of these things are in your opinion bad and should be renamed?

This is very much like asking why are you focused on fixing one bug at a time in your software when you can fix every reported bug simultaneously?

I don't know man, maybe it's because fixing this one completely inconsequential bug faces so much backlash from people like you for no particular reason other than "change bad"?

And well done with using an example from a book series where the only Asian character is named Cho Chang and where there are elves with long noses in charge of the "central bank". That really works in your favour, you totally owned me [pun intended] with that one!

Good job finding something to complain about in one of the 13 examples I listed. This unassailable refutation utterly destroys my whole argument :(

> A footman in his lordship's service stated he went into his master's bedroom [...]

isn't an example of the phrase "master bedroom".

I am also skeptical of "school house and master's bedroom". The main cottage has "four large bed rooms". Why would the "master bedroom", if it is meant to be read as it is today, be listed after the list of detached outbuildings?

Because you're thinking of homes in the modern term where one married couple owns one home and shares it with their children until they become adults and move out, instead of thinking of it as generational homes where 3-4 generations of the same family lived together.

So a master historically is not a 30-something year-old but his father in his 50s or 60s that actually owned the estate and wanted some privacy for him and his wife, hence a smaller, detached building away from the "main" building. The main building is where the master's sons and yet-unmarried daughters lived alongside the grandkids, hence needing more rooms, hence it being bigger than the building where the master lived.

I can't believe I have to explain something so basic.