> Probably obvious but is documentation and website considered as well as
> part of the KIP?
>
Documentation and website changes don't require a KIP to my knowledge,
however we should also update them as needed (beyond the obvious
documentation updates for the configuration names).
Hi Xavier,
Thank you for this proposal! It's awesome to see the community taking
action on this.
`include` and `exclude` make sense to me.
Probably obvious but is documentation and website considered as well as
part of the KIP?
This would be interesting because it could be also important to make
Hi Xavier,
Thank you very much for starting this initiative!
Not only for the changes to the code base but also for showing me
where and how we can use more appropriate terms in general.
Best,
Bruno
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:17 AM John Roesler wrote:
>
> Hi Xavier,
>
> I think your approach mad
Hi Xavier,
I think your approach made a lot of sense; I definitely didn’t mean to
criticize. Thanks for the update! The new names look good to me.
-John
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020, at 18:50, Matthias J. Sax wrote:
> Great initiative!
>
> I liked the proposed names, too.
>
>
> -Matthias
>
>
> On
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 wrote:
>
>> Please check the list for updated config / arg
Xavier, thanks for the KIP! The proposed names make sense to me.
Guozhang
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 4:24 PM Xavier Léauté 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 th
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 wrote:
> I agree we could improve on some of the config names. My
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 ren
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 wrote:
> Th
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
Yes. Thank you.
> On Jun 20, 2020, at 12:20 AM, Gwen Shapira 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 wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> There are a number of places i
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 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 ne
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://
13 matches
Mail list logo
