It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Honestly, while the controversy is incredibly stupid, it’s not something to get worked up about. Not good for your heart 😜

    You don’t have to relabel anything, just keep using old names for old stuff and maybe consider switching to main for your next GitHub project? It’s honestly not that big of a deal.

    • yogsototh@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I work for s company that suddenly asked to rename a lot of stuff. This had consequences. It cost time, money, and created a disconnect between internal to the dev vocabulary that couldn’t be changed easily and user facing vocabulary. Also we were lucky but this could gave broken some long used API that we are proud not to version because the policy we have internally is “we will NEVER break the API”. And so far, for 8 years we still haven’t.

      • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s why I said to not rename existing stuff, but to consider changing default names for new things. Or don’t. It’s not the end of the world.