There aren’t “slaves” in git, though. The term “master” in that context is that of a master copy.

And a master copy is used to produce slaves - though slave isn’t widespread in version control it’s still quite present in databases. And it all comes from the same Master/Slave naming habit.

It doesn’t. See: master tapes and the mastering process.

Sorry, the maining process.

Nope. Bitkeeper used it in the master-slave pairing and the term was carried forward. Gitlab did a whole writeup about it.

It’s funny, because a quick online search shows gitlab runs operations in Saudi Arabia. But at least a bunch of idiot westerners get to feel good about themselves 🤷‍♂️

Citizen
link
fedilink
108M

“Historically, the default name for this initial branch was master. This term came from Bitkeeper, a predecessor to Git. Bitkeeper referred to the source of truth as the “master repository” and other copies as “slave repositories”. This shows how common master/slave references have been in technology, and the difficulty in knowing how the term master should be interpreted.”

Excerpt from the link the other member posted above! You’re welcome!

Create a post

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

  • Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
  • No NSFW content.
  • Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
  • 1 user online
  • 31 users / day
  • 106 users / week
  • 580 users / month
  • 2.25K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 1.66K Posts
  • 36.8K Comments
  • Modlog