Agree with Danny Chan, -1 for this change.
Regards! Aron Tao Michael Mior <[email protected]> 于2020年8月5日周三 下午6:41写道： > My apologies for misinterpreting your previous statement then. However, I > don't see evidence to support your claims that this will bring no new > contributors nor make anyone feel more welcome. I'm not claiming that I can > point to any specific individual who will be positively impacted by this > change and I will admit that it's possible that no one will be. However, I > think the "disruption" to the project is minimal. > > Given that I was the one who proposed the change, I'll add that your > assessment that this is political is false. No one is ordering this change. > It was brought to the community for discussion. > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020, 16:44 Viliam Durina <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I was surprised that my opposition was evaluated as "not strong". None of > > my arguments were countered. I vote -1 too. > > > > - This change will not bring any new contributors > > - No contributor will "feel more welcome" by "merging into main" instead > of > > "merging into master". Nobody even thinks about it. For those who do it > > might actually feel empowering and satisfying to have some rights towards > > the master. Same as nobody is bothered by having a Master's degree. Maybe > > we should exclude people with Master's degrees from voting (just kidding > > ;-) > > - This change IS a disruption, meaning the cost is not trivial. Project > > maintainers have to do work and it's a disruption for everyone who > checked > > out the code, for every actual contributor. It's a nuisance to many > people. > > - The aim is mainly political. It signifies that a language police can > come > > over and order some changes based on extremely weak arguments. In this > > regard it's distracting and even dangerous. > > > > Not doing it would signal to the community that some common sense is > still > > left. > > > > Viliam > > > > On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 16:31, Michael Mior <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I don't want to get too into the weeds here since there hasn't been > > > any strong opposition and it seems like this is a change everyone > > > (some perhaps reluctantly) are ok with moving forward with. But a > > > couple comments: > > > > > > Has anyone expressed concern? No, but given that main is explicitly > > > neutral, I'd rather not place the burden on people who may find > > > terminology offensive to raise the issue. > > > Do I think about slavery whenever I merge into master? No, but my > > > ancestors were also not owned as slaves. > > > > > > I've opened CALCITE-4147 to track what needs to be done for this. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4147 > > > > > > -- > > > Michael Mior > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > Le mer. 29 juil. 2020 à 05:55, Ruben Q L <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I would not oppose the renaming, but I must say that I agree with > Danny > > > > Chan here. Is this really an issue? Is there any official guideline > > from > > > > the ASF about this topic? Has anyone in the Calcite community truly > > > > expressed any concern about the master branch being called "master"? > Do > > > you > > > > really think of slavery whenever you "merge into master", or whenever > > you > > > > use the term "master" in this context? > > > > > > > > I could understand renaming a "master-slave" architecture into > > something > > > > different, since that is clearly a slavery-related terminology. But, > as > > > > other people have already said, not every usage of the word "master" > > has > > > > this connotation. Honestly I see no problem in having a "master > branch" > > > > because, in my opinion, it is clear that when we talk about it we > mean > > > the > > > > "reference branch", "principal branch" or (quoting the > Merriam-Webster > > > > dictionary) the "original from which copies can be made". > > > > > > > > Maybe I am wrong here, but I have the impression that we are fixing > an > > > > artificial problem that does not actually exist. If tomorrow someone > on > > > > Twitter says that the term "class" is offensive because it has some > > > marxist > > > > connotations, should we rewrite all our Java code? This is an > extreme, > > > > stupid example (I hope, although nowadays you never know), but I > think > > > you > > > > know where I am going with my logic... > > > > > > > > We need to fight racism but IMHO this is not how to do it. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Ruben > > > > > > > > > > > > Le mer. 29 juil. 2020 à 06:54, Francis Chuang < > > [email protected]> > > > a > > > > écrit : > > > > > > > > > I am also +1 for this change. > > > > > > > > > > - It's a simple change that doesn't require a lot of effort and > > > > > disruption to the code base. > > > > > - If we follow the links from the article Michael posted, the term > > > > > "master" in git does not originate from "master record" but rather > > from > > > > > master/slave. > > > > > - We make our community more welcoming, diverse and inclusive by > > > > > switching to a term that is more inclusive. > > > > > - Sometimes a new word can be more self-explanatory. Recently > > > > > "blacklist" and "whitelist" was replaced in the Go source code with > > > > > "allowlist" and "blocklist" [1] as a case in point. > > > > > > > > > > Francis > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/236857/ > > > > > > > > > > On 29/07/2020 12:30 pm, Matt Burgess wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm a Calcite user and longtime mailing list lurker :) I'd like > to > > > > > > share our experience from Apache NiFi, we started such a > discussion > > > > > > for NiFi based on existing discussions from Apache Yetus and > Apache > > > > > > Accumulo [1]. Our own discussion continued (please see the linked > > > > > > email thread) but I believe our community came to a similar > > consensus > > > > > > as the Calcite community (and others), that whatever notions were > > > > > > educed from the terms, it is more welcoming and purposeful to > > change > > > > > > them for the best community experience. The impact to the > codebase > > > was > > > > > > minimal and non-breaking, so we came together to perform the few > > > steps > > > > > > we needed to rename the default branch and search the code for > > terms > > > > > > we could simply find-and-replace, plus we updated the Developer > > > Guide. > > > > > > Since then, we haven't seen much in the way of confusion or > > missteps > > > > > > in our development process. Everyone seems to have taken the > > changes > > > > > > in stride, updated what they needed to, and continued with their > > > > > > contributions, all the while providing a better atmosphere for > even > > > > > > better things to come. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/nifi-dev/202006.mbox/%3cCA+LyY55Mb8xZ35W_9UM=ter+gt_1azhgxmbpdn9edbssnv-...@mail.gmail.com%3e > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 9:55 PM Danny Chan <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> As a Chinsese, I didn’t understand quite well why the word > > “master” > > > can > > > > > be “slavery”. I often see it as the similiar meaning as “main”, it > > > seems to > > > > > take some time to adapt to new term “main” because I believe most > of > > > the > > > > > developers got used to the word “master”. > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> I think this is a relatively low impact change that can > > potentially > > > > > >>> make us even more welcoming to new contributors, which is a > > > benefit to > > > > > >>> us all :) > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Is this true ? People would always contribute to Calcite if they > > > need > > > > > to, apparently not just because of a branch name. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > >> Danny Chan > > > > > >> 在 2020年7月29日 +0800 AM7:08，Michael Mior <[email protected]>，写道： > > > > > >>> Actually, the argument that the term "master" in git didn't > > > originate > > > > > >>> from master/slave is not true. See the article I linked > earlier. > > In > > > > > >>> any case, I don't think the change hurts anyone other than a > > brief > > > > > >>> annoyance when we all have to change our branch name and if it > > > makes > > > > > >>> the project more welcoming to someone, than great. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> -- > > > > > >>> Michael Mior > > > > > >>> [email protected] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 17:29, Julian Hyde < > > [email protected]> > > > a > > > > > écrit : > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I agree with you. It’s probably derived from “master” as in > the > > > “gold > > > > > master” [1] which is the mix from which a sound engineer would cut > a > > > record > > > > > or CD. And who knows where that term came from? > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> But in the end, the origin of the term is irrelevant. The > > current > > > > > name is, or may be, unwelcoming to some people, so let’s just move > > on. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Julian > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio) < > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio)> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> On Jul 28, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Viliam Durina < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> It's not a term related to slavery, it has much broader > meaning > > > than > > > > > "slave > > > > > >>>>> owner", but any argument is probably vain. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 19:43, Julian Hyde < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> I am in favor of renaming ‘master’ to ‘main’. To most people > > it > > > > > doesn’t > > > > > >>>>>> make any difference. To some, such as potential members > > > currently > > > > > outside > > > > > >>>>>> the community, it makes the project more welcoming. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Very little effort or disruption is required. We’ve > > identified a > > > > > potential > > > > > >>>>>> source of friction, so let’s fix it and move on. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Julian > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Jul 28, 2020, at 10:31 AM, Michael Mior < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Hi all, > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> You can find some background on this discussion at the link > > > below > > > > > [0]. > > > > > >>>>>>> This is a topic that has come up regularly among D&I folks > at > > > the > > > > > ASF. > > > > > >>>>>>> The short summary is that the term "master" when referring > to > > > a git > > > > > >>>>>>> branch is a reference to terminology related to slavery. > I'm > > > > > >>>>>>> suggesting main because this seems to be what the developer > > > > > community > > > > > >>>>>>> as a whole is gravitating towards. See for example, > GitHub's > > > public > > > > > >>>>>>> roadmap [1] where there are plans to make this change. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm hoping that this discussion can be focused not on > whether > > > > > anyone > > > > > >>>>>>> has been impacted by such terminology, but how we can move > > > > > forward. I > > > > > >>>>>>> personally believe that if a single person feels more > welcome > > > to > > > > > >>>>>>> contribute because of the change, it's a win. I also don't > > > think > > > > > >>>>>>> making this change needs to be painful. (There are less > than > > 20 > > > > > >>>>>>> relevant references to "master" in the Calcite code.) > Apache > > > Mahout > > > > > >>>>>>> and I believe others have already made this change. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> I think this is a relatively low impact change that can > > > potentially > > > > > >>>>>>> make us even more welcoming to new contributors, which is a > > > > > benefit to > > > > > >>>>>>> us all :) > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> [0] > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.kapwing.com/blog/how-to-rename-your-master-branch-to-main-in-git/ > > > > > >>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/github/roadmap/issues/63 > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>>>> Michael Mior > > > > > >>>>>>> [email protected] > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>> Viliam Durina > > > > > >>>>> Jet Developer > > > > > >>>>> hazelcast® > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> <https://www.hazelcast.com> 2 W 5th Ave, Ste 300 | San > Mateo, > > CA > > > > > 94402 | > > > > > >>>>> USA > > > > > >>>>> +1 (650) 521-5453 | hazelcast.com <https://www.hazelcast.com > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>> This message contains confidential information and is > intended > > > only > > > > > for the > > > > > >>>>> individuals named. If you are not the named addressee you > > should > > > not > > > > > >>>>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify > the > > > sender > > > > > >>>>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by > > > mistake and > > > > > >>>>> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission > cannot > > > be > > > > > >>>>> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be > > > > > intercepted, > > > > > >>>>> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or > > contain > > > > > viruses. > > > > > >>>>> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors > > or > > > > > omissions > > > > > >>>>> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of > > > e-mail > > > > > >>>>> transmission. If verification is required, please request a > > > hard-copy > > > > > >>>>> version. -Hazelcast > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Viliam Durina > > Jet Developer > > hazelcast® > > > > <https://www.hazelcast.com> 2 W 5th Ave, Ste 300 | San Mateo, CA > 94402 | > > USA > > +1 (650) 521-5453 | hazelcast.com <https://www.hazelcast.com> > > > > -- > > This message contains confidential information and is intended only for > > the > > individuals named. If you are not the named addressee you should not > > disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender > > immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and > > delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be > > guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be > intercepted, > > corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain > viruses. > > The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or > omissions > > in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail > > transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy > > version. -Hazelcast > > >
