nifi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] rename master branch, look through code for other related issues
Date Thu, 18 Jun 2020 16:20:33 GMT
Team,

I think the key for us, in this community, is that there are couple simple
things we can do which just make it better.

1. Change the name of the default branch from 'master' to 'main' consistent
with what is happening in Github/and beyond.
2. Change from whitelist/blacklist to allow/deny or some other frankly more
clear combination.

We used to have an architecture that was master/slave.  That is long gone
and not just because the terminology wasn't helpful - the architecture
wasnt good enough.

So all that is left as far as I can tell for now is some easy stuff that at
worst makes our stuff align to common changes in the broader dev community
and uses terms that are more precise.  At best we make the community feel a
bit more welcoming for someone.  Easy day.

Thanks

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:58 AM Brandon DeVries <brd@jhu.edu> wrote:

> "Instead of banning every word out
> there, we should make the mental effort to do better than the
> political correctness movement that stops at the surface."
>
> I think this is a pretty clear false dichotomy.  Doing one doesn't preclude
> the other.  The statement above goes on:
>
> "So, let’s call it master-slave, and instead make a call for US, where
> a sizable black population is very poor, to have free healthcare, to
> have cops that are less biased against non-white people, to stop death
> penalty. This makes really a difference."
>
> ... those things seem outside the direct control of the ASF.  We should try
> to improve the things we can when we can.
>
> +1 on the change
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:24 AM Jon Logan <jmlogan@buffalo.edu> wrote:
>
> > I think this blog post from the founder of Redis sums things up:
> > http://antirez.com/news/122
> >
> > From the post:
> >
> > For example if I’m terminally ill, the “short living request”
> > terminology may be offensive, it reminds me that I’m going to die, or
> > that my father is going to die. Instead of banning every word out
> > there, we should make the mental effort to do better than the
> > political correctness movement that stops at the surface.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:05 AM Edward Armes <edward.armes@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with this, and maybe that is the potential the step forward
> here
> > > is: issue a statement is issued saying something like this is a complex
> > > issue and instead of making changes that could cause further division
> > > within the community we are looking for those that are interested to
> help
> > > form a constructive working group that will help influence and resolve
> > all
> > > of these issues in a positive way for all not only for project but also
> > > within the wider group of apache projects.
> > >
> > > Edward
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, 11:17 Uwe@Moosheimer.com, <Uwe@moosheimer.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Language is always changing and the meaning of words is changing,
> > > > sometimes positively and sometimes negatively.
> > > > I think that now is time for change again and we should discuss the
> use
> > > > of phrases and meanings.
> > > >
> > > > Of course we should change "Master Branch" to "Main Branch".
> > > > But I also think that we shouldn't just make quick changes because
> it's
> > > > opportune and hastily change a few words.
> > > >
> > > > An example: We could change Master/Slave to Leader/Follower. This may
> > be
> > > > a perfect choice for most people in the world.
> > > > In German Leader is the English word for "Führer". And it is
> precisely
> > > > this word that we in Germany do not actually want to use for it.
> > > >
> > > > What I mean is that every country and every group (e.g. religion
> etc.)
> > > > has its own history and certain words or phrases are just not a
> perfect
> > > > choice.
> > > > We should try to go the ethically correct way worldwide.
> > > >
> > > > This concerns the adaptation of current words and phrases with a view
> > to
> > > > all: in English, Indian, Chinese, German etc. but also for indigenous
> > > > peoples, different religions etc.
> > > > And cultural differences should also be taken into account.
> > > >
> > > > What I would wish for:
> > > > Apache.org should set up an "Ethics Board". A group of people of
> > > > different genders, all colors, religions and from different countries
> > > > and cultures all over our world.
> > > > This Ethics Board should find good and for no one discriminating
> words
> > > > or phrases for all the areas that stand out today as offensive.
> > > >
> > > > And it would be nice if not only computer scientists participated,
> but
> > > > also ethicists, philosophers, engineers, various religious people,
> > > > chemists, biologists, physicists, sociologists, etc.
> > > >
> > > > And this Council should set binding targets for all projects.
> > > >
> > > > Am 18.06.2020 um 09:36 schrieb Pierre Villard:
> > > > >> In my perspective this should be an issue for the entire
> community.
> > > > Being
> > > > >> able to identify an issue that directly affects another person
but
> > not
> > > > >> one’s self is the definition of privilege. If I can look at
how
> the
> > > use
> > > > of
> > > > >> these words in someone’s daily life or career impacts them
> > negatively,
> > > > > when
> > > > >> the change would not harm me at all, I see that as a failure
on my
> > > > part. I
> > > > >> understand the desire to hear from the silent majority, but active
> > > > >> participation and discussion on the mailing list is the exact
> > measure
> > > > >> described by the Apache process for participation in the
> community.
> > > > Those
> > > > >> who speak here are the ones who will have a voice.
> > > > > I could not agree more with the above.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le jeu. 18 juin 2020 à 04:29, Tony Kurc <tkurc@apache.org>
a
> écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> I suppose I was a bit remiss in not unwinding and/or summarizing
> > some
> > > of
> > > > >> what was in that yetus thread to prime the discussion, but a
some
> of
> > > > what
> > > > >> Andy is mentioning is expanded on a bit in this ietf document
[1],
> > > > which is
> > > > >> linked in one of the articles.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 1. https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020, 10:02 PM Andy LoPresto <
> alopresto@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Hi Edward, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’ll reply
inline.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> - Some of the terms proposed are not industry standard
and may
> > > > >>> potentially
> > > > >>>> cause significant issue for non-english speakers.
> > > > >>> I actually believe making these changes will _improve_ the
> clarity
> > > for
> > > > >>> non-english speakers. “Whitelist” and “blacklist”
confer no
> > inherent
> > > > >> reason
> > > > >>> to mean allow and deny other than connotative biases. “Allow”
and
> > > > “deny”
> > > > >>> explicitly indicate the verb that is happening. Another example
> is
> > > > branch
> > > > >>> naming. “Masters” don’t have “branches”. “Trunks”
do. These terms
> > > make
> > > > >>> _more_ sense for a non-English speaker than the current terms.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> - For each change that is made can we guarantee that
we will not
> > > lose
> > > > >>>> clarity of meaning, and then have revert the change down
the
> line
> > if
> > > > >> the
> > > > >>>> change causes a drop in usage.
> > > > >>> I don’t expect the community will opt to change the new
terms
> back
> > to
> > > > >> ones
> > > > >>> with negative connotations in the future. If there is discussion
> > > about
> > > > >> it,
> > > > >>> this thread will provide good historical context for why
the
> > decision
> > > > was
> > > > >>> made to change it, just as the mailing list discussions do
for
> > other
> > > > code
> > > > >>> changes.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> - Of what percentage of people is this truly an issue
for and
> what
> > > > >>>> percentage isn't. Any change that has the potential to
cause a
> > major
> > > > >>> split
> > > > >>>> in the community, there must be as close as possible
to a
> > majority,
> > > > and
> > > > >>> not
> > > > >>>> just from those that are vocal and active on the mailing
lists.
> > > > >>>> Disscustions on other groups are turning toxic, and in
some
> cases
> > > are
> > > > >>>> potentially leading to the collapse of these projects
where
> these
> > > > >> changes
> > > > >>>> are being implemented with what appears to be without
the
> > agreement
> > > of
> > > > >> a
> > > > >>>> signifficant chunk of the community.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> In my perspective this should be an issue for the entire
> community.
> > > > Being
> > > > >>> able to identify an issue that directly affects another person
> but
> > > not
> > > > >>> one’s self is the definition of privilege. If I can look
at how
> the
> > > use
> > > > >> of
> > > > >>> these words in someone’s daily life or career impacts them
> > > negatively,
> > > > >> when
> > > > >>> the change would not harm me at all, I see that as a failure
on
> my
> > > > part.
> > > > >> I
> > > > >>> understand the desire to hear from the silent majority, but
> active
> > > > >>> participation and discussion on the mailing list is the exact
> > measure
> > > > >>> described by the Apache process for participation in the
> community.
> > > > Those
> > > > >>> who speak here are the ones who will have a voice.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> - From a personal perspective, I sit on the autism spectrum
and
> > have
> > > > >>> grown
> > > > >>>> up with people using words that are very offensive and
have hurt
> > me
> > > > >>> badly.
> > > > >>>> Instead of having these words as offensive and untouchable.
> Myself
> > > and
> > > > >>>> others have instead made these words our own and made
them lose
> > the
> > > > >>>> negative connotations they have. As such, I do find the
current
> > > > >>>> disscustions deeply alarming and feels like they start
to border
> > > into
> > > > >> the
> > > > >>>> realm of censorship.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> I think it’s admirable that you have responded to negative
> > > > circumstances
> > > > >>> in that way. I also recognize that not everyone has that
> > opportunity.
> > > > If
> > > > >> we
> > > > >>> can take these actions as a community to improve the experience
> for
> > > > >> others,
> > > > >>> I am in favor of that.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> - One final point (and potentially controversial), A
good chunk
> of
> > > the
> > > > >>>> wording that is proposed to be changed. Is being done
so on the
> > > > >>>> "modern"/"street" definition of these words and not the
actual
> > > > >>> definition.
> > > > >>>> Language should change and evolve to introduce clarity,
but
> right
> > > now
> > > > >>> does
> > > > >>>> this change improve the clarity across the engineering
sector
> and
> > I
> > > > >>> believe
> > > > >>>> it won't.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I’ll paraphrase Emily Kager here with “developers spend
an
> > inordinate
> > > > >>> amount of time and energy arguing about the meaning and semantics
> > of
> > > > >>> variable and method names, but pretend exclusionary terms
are
> > > > >> meaningless.”
> > > > >>> [1] If we can expend that much energy deciding if a method
> creates
> > > vs.
> > > > >>> builds vs. forms an imaginary concept like a
> > > > >>> LibraryFrameworkWrapperDecorator, I refuse to concede that
we can
> > and
> > > > in
> > > > >>> fact should do so with the terms that actually affect our
> community
> > > > >>> members’ lives.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [1] https://twitter.com/EmilyKager/status/1271102865889734656
<
> > > > >>> https://twitter.com/EmilyKager/status/1271102865889734656>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Andy LoPresto
> > > > >>> alopresto@apache.org
> > > > >>> alopresto.apache@gmail.com
> > > > >>> He/Him
> > > > >>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4  BACE 3C6E F65B
2F7D
> EF69
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Jun 17, 2020, at 6:43 PM, Edward Armes <
> edward.armes@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>> This is a difficult issue and causes no small amount
of friction
> > > every
> > > > >>>> time. I'm personally against this for the following reassons:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - Some of the terms proposed are not industry standard
and may
> > > > >>> potentially
> > > > >>>> cause significant issue for non-english speakers.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - For each change that is made can we guarantee that
we will not
> > > lose
> > > > >>>> clarity of meaning, and then have revert the change down
the
> line
> > if
> > > > >> the
> > > > >>>> change causes a drop in usage.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - Of what percentage of people is this truly an issue
for and
> what
> > > > >>>> percentage isn't. Any change that has the potential to
cause a
> > major
> > > > >>> split
> > > > >>>> in the community, there must be as close as possible
to a
> > majority,
> > > > and
> > > > >>> not
> > > > >>>> just from those that are vocal and active on the mailing
lists.
> > > > >>>> Disscustions on other groups are turning toxic, and in
some
> cases
> > > are
> > > > >>>> potentially leading to the collapse of these projects
where
> these
> > > > >> changes
> > > > >>>> are being implemented with what appears to be without
the
> > agreement
> > > of
> > > > >> a
> > > > >>>> signifficant chunk of the community.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - From a personal perspective, I sit on the autism spectrum
and
> > have
> > > > >>> grown
> > > > >>>> up with people using words that are very offensive and
have hurt
> > me
> > > > >>> badly.
> > > > >>>> Instead of having these words as offensive and untouchable.
> Myself
> > > and
> > > > >>>> others have instead made these words our own and made
them lose
> > the
> > > > >>>> negative connotations they have. As such, I do find the
current
> > > > >>>> disscustions deeply alarming and feels like they start
to border
> > > into
> > > > >> the
> > > > >>>> realm of censorship.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - One final point (and potentially controversial), A
good chunk
> of
> > > the
> > > > >>>> wording that is proposed to be changed. Is being done
so on the
> > > > >>>> "modern"/"street" definition of these words and not the
actual
> > > > >>> definition.
> > > > >>>> Language should change and evolve to introduce clarity,
but
> right
> > > now
> > > > >>> does
> > > > >>>> this change improve the clarity across the engineering
sector
> and
> > I
> > > > >>> believe
> > > > >>>> it won't.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Edward
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, 01:11 Andy LoPresto, <alopresto@apache.org
> >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>>>> I am a proponent of making this change and also using
> allow/deny
> > > > list,
> > > > >>>>> meddler-in-the-middle, etc.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Here is a blog [1] with easy instructions for executing
the
> > change
> > > in
> > > > >>> git,
> > > > >>>>> although I don’t know if there is any Apache-integration
> specific
> > > > >>> changes
> > > > >>>>> we would also need.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> [1]
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.hanselman.com/blog/EasilyRenameYourGitDefaultBranchFromMasterToMain.aspx
> > > > >>>>> Andy LoPresto
> > > > >>>>> alopresto@apache.org
> > > > >>>>> alopresto.apache@gmail.com
> > > > >>>>> He/Him
> > > > >>>>> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4  BACE 3C6E
F65B 2F7D
> > EF69
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:06 PM, Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I suspect it would be fairly easy to make this
change.  We
> do, I
> > > > >> think,
> > > > >>>>>> have whitelist/blacklist in there somewhere but
im not sure
> how
> > > > >>> involved.
> > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:04 PM Tony Kurc <tkurc@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> All,
> > > > >>>>>>> I've seen the discussion started on other
projects [1][2],
> so I
> > > > >> wanted
> > > > >>>>> to
> > > > >>>>>>> kick off a discussion to determine whether
this is something
> > nifi
> > > > >>> could
> > > > >>>>>>> look at too. Allen Wittenauer's post to yetus
captures the
> why
> > > and
> > > > >>> some
> > > > >>>>> of
> > > > >>>>>>> the how, so rather than copy and pasting,
you can take a look
> > at
> > > > >> what
> > > > >>>>> he's
> > > > >>>>>>> done. Thoughts?
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Tony
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> 1.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd38afa9fb6c0dcd77d1a677f1152b7398b3bda93c9106b3393149d10%40%3Cdev.yetus.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>>>>>> 2.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0825eec0c84296bdab7cf898a987f06355443241ca02b2aaa51d3ef9%40%3Cdev.accumulo.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message