nifi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] rename master branch, look through code for other related issues
Date Fri, 19 Jun 2020 01:36:00 GMT
 As long as it isn’t renamed to zeek or something, I think we should change
it and not look back.



On June 18, 2020 at 19:05:38, Mike Thomsen (mikerthomsen@gmail.com) wrote:

> As teammates and friends, it was an easy change, even if code was
involved. And I assume much easier than having the courage to ask for it.

Ironically, around the same time I had a colleague who was like the evil
opposite of that. Friend is the last word any of us would use to describe
him. He was a cautionary tale in why teams have to also maintain defense
mechanisms against toxic people who exploit empathy as a power play; it's a
common tactic of abusers/toxic people to make demands on people to change
their behavior to see how compliant they are. That former colleague, if you
got them talking about their views, could wax eloquent about tolerance,
inclusiveness, etc. and then without a hint of irony turn around and wage a
one man war on everyone else.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:53 AM Joey Frazee <joey.frazee@icloud.com.invalid>

wrote:

> +1
>
> I’m repeating this from elsewhere but I was on a team 7 years ago where a
> teammate asked us to stop using master and slave terminology, even master
> alone, because it made them uncomfortable. I can’t estimate how common
that
> feeling is but this isn’t a theoretical exercise. As teammates and
friends,
> it was an easy change, even if code was involved. And I assume much
easier
> than having the courage to ask for it.
>
> I’d say it’s also important to note that “but that’s not the original
> intended word sense” doesn’t alleviate that alienating experience. While
> potentially a matter of fact of the intent for some uses, “I want to use
> that word” is pretty unfriendly stacked against “that makes me feel
> unwelcome”.
>
> Two guidelines from the code of conduct seem particularly apropos:
>
> - Be empathetic, welcoming, friendly, and patient
>
> - Be careful in the words that we choose
>
> AFAICT there’s not an escape hatch for code, tools, or effort.
>
> -joey
>
> On Jun 18, 2020, 10:05 AM -0500, 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