I explain why I chose to rename the
master branch in my Git
Every time I start learning to ride I get disillusioned and give up due to two things; the cost, and the terminology. Referring to a horse as broken1 is still common, and it troubles me.
My own field has its own problematic terminology. I've been
master as the default branch in my Git
repositories for a while. Yet, I've continued to use it in part due to
inertia, and part analysis paralysis regarding what to use instead.
Recent events made me think, however.
If a word used to describe training horses makes me so uncomfortable
that it puts me off learning to ride, why am I still using the branch
master in my repos? No more: this summer I changed the default
across all my repos.
I don't want to deflect from tackling important systemic injustices. In the wider context renaming the default branch in my project repos is small potatoes, for sure. But it is one I can do, as an individual, on my free time.