[bug#76407] [GCD] Rename the default branch

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Freitag, dem 21.03.2025 um 21:16 +0100 schrieb Ekaitz Zarraga:
> Reasons behind it don't convince me, meaning that for me it's a
> useless change that only wants to make some imaginary people more
> comfortable making some real people uncomfortable. In my view, it's
> stupid.
What makes you uncomfortable about the proposed name?  Is there any
proposed alternative that you would like to see instead?  If not, would
you like to suggest an alternative?

> The interesting way you are putting it is like you are trying to make
> me think my opinion or feelings are not that important, which is
> exactly my point against the change. I still didn't get any real
> person telling me they are hurt by the word 'master'.
What Simon is actually trying to achieve is to tell you that your
opinion is not *the only one* that matters.  It may well be, that
everyone who thus far told you they are hurt by the word 'master' are
actually bots (beep boop) and/or engaging in US imperialism.  But there
also exists a chance that you have thus far merely avoided –
deliberately or otherwise – any real person who could convince you that
it's hurtful.

Let's take a survey to get some actual numbers.  According to [1],
master appears inoffensive to about 80% of people and offensive to less
than 10%, with the rest abstaining.  Clearly, this must mean that
branch naming is a non-issue, right?  Right?  Sadly, it's not that
simple.  For if you take a moment to consider that these people _are
real_ and they feel offended by the word master, perhaps there is
something offensive about it.

Now, if you look into the comments, you will find some more arguments
defending various people's choices of a default branch name that apply
to their personal projects and what not.  Some of those may be relevant
to Guix, some of those may be not.  As for arguments that are important
to the Guix project, I think these would be or have been brought up in
the discussion.

> I'm "hurt" by this because this is the result of US American (moral) 
> imperialism at work, and I reject it, as a citizen of the world.
Changes happen.  Even if this were the result of US imperialism – which
for the record you keep postulating without evidence; at least as far
as I can see – you would have to find a way of dealing with it.  Now,
you can choose to ignore that Git allows you to change the default
branch name and reject any proposal to do so, but I think not everyone
will do the same.

> In summary, looks like we are more open to change things to please 
> imaginary people than pleasing, lets say, just me, a real person,
> that is actually part of the project. If our goal was pleasing those
> that are uncomfortable, that would be a real debate to have.
I am not convinced, that I should please you, particularly, rather than
anyone else who participated in this process.  If you have a reason as
to why your opinion should be given special weight, I would like to
hear it.

As for only pleasing imaginary people, have you stopped to consider
that those in favour of the change could be real people and not
displeased by the change?  Because it could just so happen to be that
some folks would prefer another name over master.  Personally, I'm one
of them.  I would feel quite happy with 'main' or 'trunk'; even
'stable' if we could make that guarantee.  Now, I am aware, that this
is all a preference and to an extent de gustibus, but I think we can
come to a shared preference that maximizes happiness and minimizes harm
for Guix contributors.


> This discussion has been just some people agreeing and 
> not explaining while they called others fascists or told them they 
> SHOULD KNOW why we need to do this to become more inclusive.
Which of these mails [2,3] called others fascist?  Do feel free to
point out ones that don't appear in either query and quote them.

> I think it is my right (as it is of others) as part of the community
> to demand some explanation for the change, and for ANY change, the
> same way I would demand explanations for commits I don't understand.
> Isn't that my job here?
That ought to be covered in the Motivation of a GCD, no?  I personally
feel motivated by it.  You're free to feel differently, I have no
control over you.  But I don't think it's fair to say there's no
explanation.

> In the end, this has been put as those who reject the change are
> against social justice, and that's not an acceptable way to propose
> anything because it eliminates any possibility for a debate and
> erases the chance of anyone to be against the change. Reducing the
> issue to "If you confront -> you are against social justice".
So, assuming that you are for social justice, but against this change,
do you think this change constitutes a social injustice?
Or; assuming you are against social justice, would you rather not be
perceived as such?

> 6. I think the initial goal for the proposal was actually to look for
> confrontation.
Believe it or not, I actually was not prepared for the backlash I
received.  I actually thought this would be a straight-forward change
to implement given the values that folks here share, and I'm not happy
to be proven wrong on that.

Cheers

[1] 
https://www.reddit.com/r/dotnet/comments/wrci66/is_the_name_master_branch_offensive/
[2] https://yhetil.org/guix-devel/?q=fascist+s%3Amain+s%3Abranch
[3] https://yhetil.org/guix-patches/?q=fascist+s%3A76407