I agree with the approach. I actually ran the same "grep" command after the talk and was happy to find there should not be too much work involved to do it :-)
Side note : I've always thought SVN's "trunk" was nice as it fits with the idea of "branches" growing out of it. But there is a discussion going on at Gitlab [1] that shows "main" is probably better. [1] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/221164 Le mer. 1 juil. 2020 à 16:15, Victor Toso <victort...@redhat.com> a écrit : > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 10:03:10AM +0200, Kevin Pouget wrote: > > Hello SPICE community, > > > > following Chris Wright (Red Hat CTO) blog post on "Making open > > source more inclusive by eradicating problematic language" [1], > > I would like to suggest that we have a look at SPICE source > > code to find out if/where such language is used and how to > > remove it. > > > > To illustrate the motivations of this move, consider the phrase > > "the final solution". I am quite sure you would agree that > > these words cannot be used inside a project. You would agree > > because the WWII events are still in minds and not so ancient > > yet. Git "master", or the "master/slave" pattern may not > > trigger similar thoughts if your ancestors didn't suffer > > slavery; "whitelist/blacklist" neither, if the color of your > > skin doesn't get you into trouble (white=allow, black=deny). > > Overall, I would advise, when thinking about these questions, > > not to forget on which side your history/country/skin > > color/sexual orientation sits you. If it's the oppressor side, > > you're not at the right place to say it's not relevant. > > > > --- > > > > I had a quick `grep` look at SPICE code base, searching for > > `blacklist/whitelist/slave` and I could only find very few > > occurrences of these words, which is nice. Can you find other > > problem words? > > > > `master` is used for git default's branch, but not much > > elsewhere. Let's discuss if we could get rid of this one, for > > instance changing it to `main` (just a suggestion). I don't > > think that it can break that many things (only the CI comes to > > my mind, where the `master` branch may be treated differently) > > as git name default branch's name is often omitted in the usual > > workflows. > > > > Please share your thoughts about this > > Not a native english speaker but I've read a few discussions > around the user of master as git as in master copy instead of > master/slave. Another examples of the use of master from native > speakers included master as in school teacher or someone that is > in charge of something (the offense being where the subject of > control is the slave). > > Still, I don't really mind to changing it to main, even more if > there are people that feel this can really be offensive in some > way.. > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > -- Julien ROPÉ Senior Software Engineer - SPICE jr...@redhat.com <https://www.redhat.com/>
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
