"Personally I do not consider the effort worthwhile, but this is my personal opinion. [...] I don't want, as a result of my ideas, to create problems to the Redis community."

Interesting – looks like he made those commits a handful of days after this article came out (written Sep 7 2018, commits were Sep 10~13 2018).

It seems they weren't released in GA until 6.0.0, which came out in April 2020.

It's paradoxical that they want these changes merged to "master".

Master has multiple meanings, not just slave master. As in mastery, master tape, master craftsman. In git, there are no "slave" branches, so "master" does not evoke slavery.

On the contrary, naming of "master" branch in git does seem to derive from master/slave terminology... https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/...

That's hearsay. Bitkeeper uses master/slave for repositories not branches.

I agree with you but they seem to be changing the default 'master' in github because of this. https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1271253144442253312

They could always rename the "master" btanch [0] to something else, I suppose.

---

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23473387

Trunk is a better term for the long lived main branch of an SCM tree anyway.