18/08/2023 19:45, Stephen Hemminger: > The term 'abort' is on the inclusive namin Tier 1 word list > as replace when possible. It is possible to do this across > DPDK except the few places that directly call the lib C abort() > function. > > v2 - drop changes to sfc since requires changes to base driver > - cleanup some checkpatch and missing spots > > Rationale (from https://inclusivenaming.org/word-lists/tier-1/abort/) > > The term “abort” frequently appeared in Inclusive Language > Initiative surveys and standards reviews. Multiple organizations felt > that usage of the word posed an issue worth addressing in their > individual companies and projects. Given this widespread interest, the > INI has decided to offer its own guidance. > > INI recommends replacing “abort” wherever possible. In accordance with > the INI’s language framework, the term does not necessarily constitute > a first-order concern. However, because it is such a charged term > outside of computing, “abort” fails to provide a clear description of > the action being taken, and serves primarily to distract. There are > numerous other words in the English language that can serve the same > purpose in computing without invoking the emotionally charged cultural > context of “abort.” > > Although the INI debated whether the word “abort” itself or the > procedure commonly associated with it (“abortion”) caused the > aforementioned distractions, the etymology of the word has a direct > and unambiguous link to the termination of a pregnancy. Alternative > uses of the word “abort” are in use today, such as in > rocketry. However, the INI concluded that the term itself was > insufficiently distanced from its original meaning for those > alternative definitions to be its primary association. > > All this being said, the INI does not advocate for a blanket > replacement of the term. “Abort” appears in many standards > organization documents, and is deeply embedded in some operating > systems. As such, the INI acknowledges that the term may need to > be retained in certain contexts to remain in compliance with those > standards, or to preserve accurate documentation for bedrock > functions and processes that are too fundamental to be changed. > > Some organizations have noted that using “abort” in contexts other > than the medical or political serves to de-stigmatize the term, > thereby promoting reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. Conversely, > discouraging the term could be interpreted as accepting a framing that > denies a pregnant person’s right to control their body. The judgment > of the INI is that the term causes discomfort or offense without > providing a necessary degree of technical clarity, and therefore it > should be avoided. At some future point, because language changes over > time, “abort” may become a less contentious term; at that juncture, > the appropriateness of the term may be revisited.
I don't feel the rationale should be followed here. If there are better terms, why not. But really, "abort" is not only medical. And banning this word may be felt as a political position, which is not what we want. I am OK to replace if there is a better word in some contexts, but we should not make it forbidden.
