Great initiative! I liked the proposed names, too.
-Matthias On 6/22/20 4:48 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Xavier, thanks for the KIP! The proposed names make sense to me. > > Guozhang > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 4:24 PM Xavier Léauté <xav...@confluent.io> wrote: > >> Please check the list for updated config / argument names. >> >> I also added a proposal to replace the term "blackout" with "backoff", >> which is used internally in the replication protocol. >> >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM Xavier Léauté <x...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> I agree we could improve on some of the config names. My thinking here is >>> that unless we had some precedent for a different name, it seemed >>> relatively straightforward to follow the approach other open source >>> projects have taken. It also makes migration for users easy if we are >>> consistent in the renaming, so we should find terms we can use across the >>> board. >>> >>> A cursory search indicates we already use include/exclude for topic >>> creation config in Connect, so I think it makes sense to align on that. >>> I'll update the KIP accordingly. >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:37 AM Ryanne Dolan <ryannedo...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Xavier, I'm dismayed to see some of these instances are my fault. Fully >>>> support your plan. >>>> >>>> John, I had the same thought -- "list" is extraneous here. In the case >> of >>>> "topics.whitelist" we already have precedent to just use "topics". >>>> >>>> Ryanne >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 12:43 PM John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Xavier! >>>>> >>>>> I’m +1 on this idea, and I’m glad this is the extent of what needs to >>> be >>>>> changed. I recall when I joined the project being pleased at the lack >>> of >>>>> common offensive terminology. I hadn’t considered >> whitelist/blacklist, >>>> but >>>>> I can see the argument. >>>>> >>>>> Allowlist/blocklist are kind of a mouthful, though. >>>>> >>>>> What do you think of just “allow” and “deny” instead? This is common >>>>> terminology in ACLs for example, and it doesn’t really seem necessary >>> to >>>>> say “list” in the config name. >>>>> >>>>> Alternatively, looking at the actual configs, it seems like >> “include”, >>>>> “include-only” (or “only”) and “exclude” might be more appropriate in >>>>> context. >>>>> >>>>> I hope this doesn’t kick off a round of bikeshedding. I’m really fine >>>>> either way; I doubt it matters much. I just wanted to see if we can >>> name >>>>> these configs without making up new multi-syllable words. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for bringing it up! >>>>> -John >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, at 09:31, Ron Dagostino wrote: >>>>>> Yes. Thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 20, 2020, at 12:20 AM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you so much for this initiative. Small change, but it makes >>> our >>>>>>> community more inclusive. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gwen >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 6:02 PM Xavier Léauté <x...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Everyone, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are a number of places in our codebase that use racially >>>> charged >>>>>>>> terms. I am proposing we update them to use more neutral terms. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The KIP lists the ones I have found and proposes alternatives. >> If >>>> you >>>>> see >>>>>>>> any I missed or did not consider, please reply and I'll add >> them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-629%3A+Use+racially+neutral+terms+in+our+codebase >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>> Xavier >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
