Steering Council update for February
Hi everyone, The Steering Council just published the community update for February: https://github.com/python/steering-council/blob/main/updates/2021-02-steerin... As a reminder, we'll are trying to keep this up monthly. As you can see we are mainly focusing on clearing the PEP backlog and to address ongoing efforts and time-sensitive issues. Here you can find the text for the update: February 01 - After more deliberation and consideration of all available information, the Steering Council accepted the Pattern Matching PEPs. The Steering Council agreed that high-quality documentation is crucial in this feature and therefore its presence should be required before the release. A response in the name of the Steering Council will be sent to python-dev addressing the decision and the Steering Council view of the process. - The Steering Council discussed Debian's Python distro issues. The Steering Council will collect and communicate where the concerns are to the Debian maintainers. Thomas started a draft of the communication that the Steering Council will review, complete and sign-off. <https://github.com/python/steering-council/blob/main/updates/2021-02-steering-council-update.md#february-08>February 08 - The Steering Council started the discussion of PEP 651. It was decided that the group will leave this open for next week to better deliberate and consider more information. - The Steering Council discussed the ongoing work on porting types in the standard library to heap-types. It was decided that through Pablo, the Steering Council will ask the core developers driving those changes to create an informational PEP and not to make any more changes in this area after beta 1, as per our general policy. - The Steering Council discussed adding a TOML module to the standard library. It was decided that maintainers should write a PEP. On the topic of the standard library, it was agreed that the Steering Council should present at the PyCon US 2021 Language Summit on the future of the standard library and Brett is going to gather data on what PRs are tied to which module, which modules are imported and used the most, commit churn to help start the planning so we can make data-driven discussions and decisions. - The acceptance notice for PEP 634 will be sent from the Steering Council email, and Thomas will send rejection notices to other competing PEPs that are therefore rejected. <https://github.com/python/steering-council/blob/main/updates/2021-02-steering-council-update.md#february-15>February 15 [ The SC could not meet this week due to holidays in the US and Canada, and the impossibility to find a common replacement date in the week ] <https://github.com/python/steering-council/blob/main/updates/2021-02-steering-council-update.md#february-22>February 22 - The Steering Council discussed PEP 651 request and has decided to reject it. An email with the rationale will be sent to the author and python-dev. - Ezio joined the Steering Council meeting today to give an update on the GitHub Migration. GitHub was dormant during the holiday months. Ezio and GH had a productive meeting a couple of weeks ago. He is working on the tool that will convert bpo issues into a format that the GH tool will accept. He will also work on a community update once the test repo is ready. Another sync up has been scheduled between Ezio and the SC on March 29th. - The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that. The group is going to discuss the timeline and how to approach this with other repositories under the Python organization in some future meeting. - The Steering Council discussed the Debian situation. The group discussed ways to approach the situation and how to coordinate with Debian maintainers so it can benefit the Python community at large. It was decided that the steering council will email the Debian maintainers to try to reach some common ground and discuss how to proceed. Regards from cloudy London, Pablo Galindo Salgado
On 3/9/2021 3:27 PM, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council just published the community update for February:
Thank you for posting this.
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people? -- Terry Jan Reedy
On Mar 9, 2021, at 4:27 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 3:27 PM, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council just published the community update for February:
Thank you for posting this.
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
Hi Terry, this is happening in many places - for example, see https://sfconservancy.org/news/2020/jun/23/gitbranchname/ https://github.com/github/renaming tl;dr ‘master’ has unpleasant connotations for many, so it’s being changed in many places/many projects. best, —titus
Does 'master' confuse people?
There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist. Github has decided on "main" being a suitable replacement: https://github.com/github/renaming . I have no inside information on the Python steering council, but I assume they are following Githubs guidance. Hope this info helps, (He / Him) Damian On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:31 PM Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 3:27 PM, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council just published the community update for February:
Thank you for posting this.
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
-- Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/EMXFMHSF... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people?
There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository. I detest these changes that create churn and don't actually solve any problems. They allow people to feel good about themselves for having "made a change", while actually making no useful change whatsoever (are disadvantaged people's lives going to be improved by this rename?). What next? Are we going to crack down on any courses that proclaim to help you to "master the Python language"? Does that, too, have to be renamed? ChrisA
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term. A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out). Anyway, this is yet another SJW non-issue (countries other than US don't have a modern history of slavery) so this change is a political statement rather than has any technical merit.
I detest these changes that create churn and don't actually solve any problems. They allow people to feel good about themselves for having "made a change", while actually making no useful change whatsoever (are disadvantaged people's lives going to be improved by this rename?). What next? Are we going to crack down on any courses that proclaim to help you to "master the Python language"? Does that, too, have to be renamed?
ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UQOPOWD7... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Regards, Ivan
On 3/9/2021 8:03 PM, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
countries other than US don't have a modern history of slavery Putting both politics and programming aside, this isn't quite so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom#1950.E2.80.93present <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom#1950.E2.80.93present>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:09 PM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term.
A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out).
I understand about master-slave architectures, where one device is controlling another. That's not what I'm arguing here. Is the sense of "pristine" or "original" derived from this too? Other branches are not "slaved" to the master branch. They are copies of it. It is a quite different meaning of the word. ChrisA
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:10 AM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term.
A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out).
Petr Baudis (who named "master" branch) says its origin is "master recording". So it is unrelated to master-slave. https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441
Anyway, this is yet another SJW non-issue (countries other than US don't have a modern history of slavery) so this change is a political statement rather than has any technical merit.
Yes. If we don't change the name, we need to pay our energy to same discussion every year. It is not productive. Let's change the name and stop further discussion. -- Inada Naoki <songofacandy@gmail.com>
On 10/03/2021 01:30, Inada Naoki wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:10 AM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
Anyway, this is yet another SJW non-issue (countries other than US don't have a modern history of slavery) so this change is a political statement rather than has any technical merit.
Yes. If we don't change the name, we need to pay our energy to same discussion every year. It is not productive. Let's change the name and stop further discussion.
+1 for this analysis. It is a modern shibboleth, but let's not invite people to leave who are reluctant to make the right noises -- that's an unfortunate response. A bit off topic ... It is surprising to read that slavery is unique to US history. Maybe institutionally, amongst large democracies, the US was late to abolish it. But even in the UK, where we are proud that decency overcame self-interest, peacefully and slightly ahead of the US, in practice it remains a problem today. (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/modern-slavery) Anything directly helpful is likely to be done outside the framework of the PSF, and not because we changed a branch name. However, it's odds on that those tackling it here are using Python for data science. Jeff Allen
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:30:43 +0900 Inada Naoki <songofacandy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:10 AM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term.
A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out).
Petr Baudis (who named "master" branch) says its origin is "master recording". So it is unrelated to master-slave. https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441
And the origin of the English word is the latin noun "magister": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/magister#Latin Regards Antoine.
On 10/03/2021 10.30, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:30:43 +0900 Inada Naoki <songofacandy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:10 AM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term.
A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out).
Petr Baudis (who named "master" branch) says its origin is "master recording". So it is unrelated to master-slave. https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441
And the origin of the English word is the latin noun "magister": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/magister#Latin
Words change meaning. For example take the word "dumb". It used to mean "mute" or "speechless". Ableism turned its meaning into "stupid" / "nonintellectual" as people equated speaking/hearing disability with mental disability. Fun fact: German language adopted the new meaning while Dutch language kept the original meaning of the word. In German phrase "Bist du doof?" translates to "Are you dumb?" while the Dutch sentence "Ben je doof" means "Are you deaf?". I grew up close to the border of the Netherlands and had a friend who's little brother was deaf. This caused some confusing on my side when he told a Dutch person "mijn broer is doof".
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:14:26 +0100 Christian Heimes <christian@python.org> wrote:
On 10/03/2021 10.30, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:30:43 +0900 Inada Naoki <songofacandy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:10 AM Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:
On 10.03.2021 3:53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does 'master' confuse people? There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
It is, actually, the ultimate origin of the term.
A more immediate origin is the master-slave architecture (the master agent initiates some operation and slave agents respond to it and/or carry it out).
Petr Baudis (who named "master" branch) says its origin is "master recording". So it is unrelated to master-slave. https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441
And the origin of the English word is the latin noun "magister": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/magister#Latin
Words change meaning.
Definitely. But if one wants to make a historical argument, it cannot stop at one point in history ;-) In any case, "main" (or hg's "default") is certainly a better generic word for the concept than "master". Whether or not it's worth breaking many pieces of automation out there I'm skeptical about. Regards Antoine.
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 17:54 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people?
There's a general movement to replace language from common programming
practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
I detest these changes that create churn and don't actually solve any problems. They allow people to feel good about themselves for having "made a change", while actually making no useful change whatsoever (are disadvantaged people's lives going to be improved by this rename?). What next? Are we going to crack down on any courses that proclaim to help you to "master the Python language"? Does that, too, have to be renamed?
What an unfortunate response, but feel free to find something else to do after the change has been made.
On 10/03/2021 01.53, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 AM Damian Shaw <damian.peter.shaw@gmail.com> wrote:
Does 'master' confuse people?
There's a general movement to replace language from common programming practises that derive from, or are associated with, the dehumanization of people. Such as master and slave, as well as whitelist and blacklist.
Is that *actually* the origin of the term in this context, or is it the "master", the pristine, the original from which copies are made? There's no "slave" branch anywhere in the git repository.
There is some historical evidence that the developers of git adopted the term from Bitkeeper. After all git was created when Bitkeeper changed its pricing model back in mid of 2000s. Bitkeeper uses master and slave terminology, https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask#L232
We are then going to modify the file on both the master and slave repository and then merge the work. For the sake of simplicity, we are doing work in the master repository.
Christian
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
I assume the change will not be abrupt, and people will be notified of the change ahead of time, so we can adjust our scripts accordingly. There are some info about branch renaming here: https://github.com/github/renaming On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 3:27 PM, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council just published the community update for February:
Thank you for posting this.
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
-- Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/EMXFMHSF... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 16:46 -0800, Mariatta wrote:
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that. I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
I assume the change will not be abrupt, and people will be notified of the change ahead of time, so we can adjust our scripts accordingly.
There are some info about branch renaming here: https://github.com/github/renaming
Hi Mariatta, Have you considered not deleting the master branch and instead simply adding a github workflow job that syncs main to master on pushes to main? The master->main Github redirection is great but perhaps not the best option for the CPython repo. I find it very useful for smaller projects, but for something as big as CPython I feel it will still cause too much breakage, and a not that trivial to notice one, too many people with too many workflows dependent on the branch name. Though, it can be argued the people that work on CPython and have such workflows will likely be in the loop regarding such change and so it isn't a big deal. Anyway, this was just something to consider, hopefully it was somewhat helpful :) Cheers, Filipe Laíns
The Steering Council unanimously believes this is the right thing to do. Fortunately GitHub makes it very easy from their side. We push a button and it makes the change for the repo and all PRs. Then when you visit the repo page in GH, it tells you exactly what commands to run to make the change in your local repo. It’s even cut-and-pasteable. We want to be mindful of the timing, both so that folks have plenty of notice to update their scripts and recipes, but also to coordinate with the release managers so that the switch happens when it won’t break the release process. Cheers, -Barry On Mar 9, 2021, at 16:27, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 3:27 PM, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council just published the community update for February:
Thank you for posting this.
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
I did not that this was an issue. This will break 4 of my .bat files (update repository and workspaces, build python.exes, run sphinx on docs, run coverage.) and, I presume, many other workflow scripts and bots. What is the upside? ('next (version)' might be more accurately descriptive, but 'main' works as the 'main branch we are working on'.) Does 'master' confuse people?
-- Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/EMXFMHSF... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 08:27:19PM +0000, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
And about time too. Can we now tackle some of the equally pressing use of offensive terms that are common in the Python community, starting with the name of the language itself? Pythons are snakes, which is triggering to people with a phobia of snakes. About one third of all people, or more than two *billion* people, suffer from some level of phobia towards snakes. The popular "nose" testing framework is a blatant antisemetic and neo-nazi dog whistle. "bool" is named after George Boole, a problematic white man who appropriated the culture of both the Middle East and East Asia. "dict" is confusable with, and is often abbreviated to, an offensive word. And don't even get me started with the obvious sexism of "tty". Unicode is racist because it has unified Chinese, Japanese and Korean characters as if they were the same thing, and relegates non-Western languages to second class status: https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of-poo-but-i-cant-... It also includes a teddy bear symbol, which is named after notorious racist and imperialist Theodore Roosevelt, and no less than *six* swastika symbols. Also the Cross of Jerusalem, the symbol of such openly fascist groups as the Federal State of Austria during the 1930s and the Russian far-right extremist organisation the People's National Party. It even has a symbol for chains, which is associated even more closely with slavery than "master". Speaking of slavery, in the standard library we have ChainMap and itertools.chain. We have the ableist "runpy", and in the random module a function named after Vilfredo Pareto, who supported the rule of fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. There are the token and tokenize modules, which are offensive for their association with both sexist and racist views. The tarfile module is associated with the racist Uncle Remus stories, and a derogatory term for US Blacks. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/doug-lamborns-tar-baby-qua... The textwrap module uses a derogatory racist and fatphobic term dozens of times. http://rsdb.org/slur/chunk Each of these issues are just as important as the "master" issue. -- Steve
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: […] Insults,
Dear all, Apparently renaming a git branch to follow the general convention is now an unbearable outrage. It strikes me as a somewhat odd hill to die on, but okay. However there is a code of conduct that is supposed to be followed here https://www.python.org/psf/conduct. Let me quote put downs, or jokes that are based upon stereotypes, that are exclusionary, or that hold others up for ridicule If the discussion here can stay civil for changes with far more repercussions for Python (e.g. controversial PEPs), surely it can stay civil for this too. So could we all please refrain ourselves from non-constructive and derogatory comments? If this change actually causes non-hypothetical issues, let us discuss these instead of resorting to poor attempts at being cleverly sarcastic. Best, E On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 12:54, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 08:27:19PM +0000, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
The Steering Council discussed renaming the master branch to main and the consensus was that we should do that.
And about time too. Can we now tackle some of the equally pressing use of offensive terms that are common in the Python community, starting with the name of the language itself?
Pythons are snakes, which is triggering to people with a phobia of snakes. About one third of all people, or more than two *billion* people, suffer from some level of phobia towards snakes.
The popular "nose" testing framework is a blatant antisemetic and neo-nazi dog whistle.
"bool" is named after George Boole, a problematic white man who appropriated the culture of both the Middle East and East Asia.
"dict" is confusable with, and is often abbreviated to, an offensive word. And don't even get me started with the obvious sexism of "tty".
Unicode is racist because it has unified Chinese, Japanese and Korean characters as if they were the same thing, and relegates non-Western languages to second class status:
https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/i-can-text-you-a-pile-of-poo-but-i-cant-...
It also includes a teddy bear symbol, which is named after notorious racist and imperialist Theodore Roosevelt, and no less than *six* swastika symbols. Also the Cross of Jerusalem, the symbol of such openly fascist groups as the Federal State of Austria during the 1930s and the Russian far-right extremist organisation the People's National Party.
It even has a symbol for chains, which is associated even more closely with slavery than "master".
Speaking of slavery, in the standard library we have ChainMap and itertools.chain.
We have the ableist "runpy", and in the random module a function named after Vilfredo Pareto, who supported the rule of fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. There are the token and tokenize modules, which are offensive for their association with both sexist and racist views.
The tarfile module is associated with the racist Uncle Remus stories, and a derogatory term for US Blacks.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/doug-lamborns-tar-baby-qua...
The textwrap module uses a derogatory racist and fatphobic term dozens of times.
Each of these issues are just as important as the "master" issue.
-- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/LZKYCN6K... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:13 PM Evpok Padding <evpok.padding@gmail.com> wrote:
Apparently renaming a git branch to follow the general convention is now an unbearable outrage. It strikes me as a somewhat odd hill to die on, but okay. However there is a code of conduct that is supposed to be followed here https://www.python.org/psf/conduct. Let me quote
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include: […] Insults, put downs, or jokes that are based upon stereotypes, that are exclusionary, or that hold others up for ridicule
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant practice on GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that political sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices. Yes, in Latin the sense of 'magister' was "teacher" fairly neutrally. That is not more accurate for the source control intent than is 'main'. This passes through both the Old French 'maistre' with pretty much the Latin meaning, as well as through Old English 'maegister'. By the time of Middle English in the mid-14th century CE, the sense of "dominance" is the predominant one, specifically in the patriarchal meaning of "male head of a household" prior to the Atlantic Slave Trade (also not an insinuation we wish to promote). It even has a symbol for chains, which is associated even more closely
with slavery than "master".
All the other examples are also forced and contrived. This is perhaps worst. I own several chains for purposes having nothing to do with bondage or oppression. Towing a car, hanging a bird feeder, and affixing a fence gate are well served by interlocked loops of metal. Which is honestly, a pretty good skeuomorphic mnemonic for what ChainMap does. -- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions.
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:23:33 +0000 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant practice on GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that political sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices.
Uh... Since you're putting "fun" in quotes, I assume this is quoting someone else? (who?) Regards Antoine.
On 2021-03-10 15:17, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:23:33 +0000 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant practice on GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that political sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices.
Uh... Since you're putting "fun" in quotes, I assume this is quoting someone else? (who?)
It's not a quote, it's Irony punctuation (in this case, used to indicate sarcasm): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_punctuation
I echo Barry's earlier response. To directly address individuals who object to renaming the branch: I respect your opinion. As I weigh the benefits of keeping the status quo with the benefits of changing, I see the change as a temporary inconvenience to update the branch once in order to open the door to the benefits of conforming to the new industry norm and the simplification that brings to tooling configuration and user/contributor documentation. Thanks. On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 7:49 AM MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
On 2021-03-10 15:17, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:23:33 +0000 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant practice on GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that political sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices.
Uh... Since you're putting "fun" in quotes, I assume this is quoting someone else? (who?)
It's not a quote, it's Irony punctuation (in this case, used to indicate sarcasm):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_punctuation _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/RJUCHSTS... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
While, I agree "master" is not and should not be considered a derogatory term—it has demonstrable valid usage—unfortunately the broad usage of "master/slave" terminology in technology muddies the waters. If it's not changed, the debate about the continuing to use the term will likely be ongoing. So, despite there being no technical merit to the change, my vote would be +1 to change to main, simply to avoid distraction from inevitable ongoing pushes to change it. On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 08:11 -0800, Carol Willing wrote:
I echo Barry's earlier response.
To directly address individuals who object to renaming the branch: I respect your opinion. As I weigh the benefits of keeping the status quo with the benefits of changing, I see the change as a temporary inconvenience to update the branch once in order to open the door to the benefits of conforming to the new industry norm and the simplification that brings to tooling configuration and user/contributor documentation.
Thanks.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 7:49 AM MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:23:33 +0000 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant
GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that
On 2021-03-10 15:17, Antoine Pitrou wrote: practice on political
sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices.
Uh... Since you're putting "fun" in quotes, I assume this is quoting someone else? (who?)
It's not a quote, it's Irony punctuation (in this case, used to indicate sarcasm):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_punctuation _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/RJUCHSTS...
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/BZQPFFBS... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:38:46 +0000 MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
On 2021-03-10 15:17, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:23:33 +0000 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Renaming main branches as 'main' is currently predominant practice on GitHub (and more broadly in Free Software communities). Python doesn't need to cling to an old name based on a tired argument that political sensitivity is a creeping plot to destroy old "fun" prejudices and injustices.
Uh... Since you're putting "fun" in quotes, I assume this is quoting someone else? (who?)
It's not a quote, it's Irony punctuation (in this case, used to indicate sarcasm):
Sarcasm about what? About slavery? I don't understand, sorry. In any case, be mindful that irony depends on shared cultural references, and what seems obvious to you or David may seem flabbergasting to others. Regards Antoine.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 02:23:33PM +0000, David Mertz wrote:
It even has a symbol for chains, which is associated even more closely with slavery than "master".
All the other examples are also forced and contrived. This is perhaps worst. I own several chains for purposes having nothing to do with bondage or oppression.
Chains are an almost universal symbol of bondage and slavery: "Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains", according to Rosseau (please forgive the sexism, his sense was mankind as a whole regardless of sex or gender). How is this contrived? Not just contrived, but the "worst" example of it. If "master" is hurtful and harmful because of its connotations, "chains" is even more so. There are "harmless" (supposedly) meanings for "master" too, and "master branch" is one, but we decided to remove that. And yet you are resistant to changing the others. Why? -- Steve
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, 4:30 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
All the other examples are also forced and contrived. This is perhaps worst. I own several chains for purposes having nothing to do with bondage or oppression.
Chains are an almost universal symbol of bondage and slavery: "Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains", according to Rosseau (please forgive the sexism, his sense was mankind as a whole regardless of sex or gender). How is this contrived? Not just contrived, but the "worst" example of it.
I think you actually understand this and are feigning for rhetorical effect. ChainMap is suggestive of "sequential interlocked pieces." Obviously, what it does isn't identical to the actual metal construct, but it's reminiscent though. I could imagine that that some other name of a software object could be named after chains as used in human bondage. But this one simply isn't. I genuinely cannot think of any way metaphorically to connect ChainMap to that. In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture." I saw in this thread one implausible argument that it was intended in the sense of "magister." I don't believe it, but even if we stipulate that whoever first used the word in relation to version control meant that, nearly everyone else who discusses it means "master/slave." I can also imagine some very different software object that used a different sense. If something else really did invoke "master key" (a key that fits all the locks), that might be innocuous. But again, that sense makes no sense in relation to version control, and no one believes that is the meaning.
On Mar 10, 2021, at 4:45 PM, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture." I saw in this thread one implausible argument that it was intended in the sense of "magister." I don't believe it, but even if we stipulate that whoever first used the word in relation to version control meant that, nearly everyone else who discusses it means "master/slave."
I don't think it derives from "master/slave network architecture.”. I think it derives from the use of “master” to denote an instance or prototype that is used to create identical copies or replicas, a usage that predates networking, as in master tape, master print, and, (perhaps archaically for you :)), mimeograph master. Irrelevantly, I also think all (almost all?) uses of "master/slave” to describe network architectures are lazy; there is a better existing description, e.g. “active/passive”, “polling” etc. Jonathan P.S. My preference would be “mainline” over “main”. I like railroad version diagrams.
GitLab has just posted the following re: default branches. https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/03/10/new-git-default-branch-name/ Please take a moment to pause before posting. Please consider whether additional comments are constructive. I'm concerned that rehashing the same arguments will reflect poorly on the Python Core Development community. Thank you. On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 4:35 PM Jonathan Cronin <jon@egh.com> wrote:
On Mar 10, 2021, at 4:45 PM, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture." I saw in this thread one implausible argument that it was intended in the sense of "magister." I don't believe it, but even if we stipulate that whoever first used the word in relation to version control meant that, nearly everyone else who discusses it means "master/slave."
I don't think it derives from "master/slave network architecture.”. I think it derives from the use of “master” to denote an instance or prototype that is used to create identical copies or replicas, a usage that predates networking, as in master tape, master print, and, (perhaps archaically for you :)), mimeograph master.
Irrelevantly, I also think all (almost all?) uses of "master/slave” to describe network architectures are lazy; there is a better existing description, e.g. “active/passive”, “polling” etc.
Jonathan
P.S. My preference would be “mainline” over “main”. I like railroad version diagrams. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/DONBBIFH... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On 2021-03-10 13:45, David Mertz wrote:
In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture."
It was shown upthread that this isn't the case. Do you have more accurate documentation to refute the claim? - https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio) -Mike
Google tells me... From https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask :
We are then going to modify the file on both the master and slave repository and then merge the work.
This particular passage was also cited in GNOME developer discussions regarding the usage of the term: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-May/msg00066.html On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 15:38 -0800, Mike Miller wrote:
On 2021-03-10 13:45, David Mertz wrote:
In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture."
It was shown upthread that this isn't the case. Do you have more accurate documentation to refute the claim?
- https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio)
-Mike _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/SU747SQX... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On 11/03/2021 00.38, Mike Miller wrote:
On 2021-03-10 13:45, David Mertz wrote:
In contrast, the "master" used in version control directly borrows from so-called "master/slave network architecture."
It was shown upthread that this isn't the case. Do you have more accurate documentation to refute the claim?
- https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272280760280637441 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio)
Petr Baudis (xpasky) also wrote: --- (But as noted in a separate thread, it is possible it stems from bitkeeper's master/slave terminology. I hoped to do some historical research but health emergency in my family delayed that.) Regardless, the impression words form in the reader is more important than their intent. --- https://twitter.com/xpasky/status/1272817929046962176
I don't think it's particularly constructive, even as a strawman, to imagine every conceivable way some word could be interpreted as offensive. I submit that if the community consensus is that "chain" becomes a derogatory term, then we should agree to change it too. On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 08:23 +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 02:23:33PM +0000, David Mertz wrote:
It even has a symbol for chains, which is associated even more closely with slavery than "master".
All the other examples are also forced and contrived. This is perhaps worst. I own several chains for purposes having nothing to do with bondage or oppression.
Chains are an almost universal symbol of bondage and slavery: "Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains", according to Rosseau (please forgive the sexism, his sense was mankind as a whole regardless of sex or gender). How is this contrived? Not just contrived, but the "worst" example of it.
If "master" is hurtful and harmful because of its connotations, "chains" is even more so. There are "harmless" (supposedly) meanings for "master" too, and "master branch" is one, but we decided to remove that. And yet you are resistant to changing the others. Why?
Hi, Could we please stick to the point of renaming a Git branch? Today, renaming a branch is easy. The rationale has been given. I don't think any argument is going to make the Steering Concil changing their mind ("the consensus was that we should do that"). If you want to help, please remain at the technical level to help making this migration as smooth as possible for everybody. On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:09 PM Evpok Padding <evpok.padding@gmail.com> wrote:
If the discussion here can stay civil for changes with far more repercussions for Python (e.g. controversial PEPs), surely it can stay civil for this too.
Thanks. For people able to remain constructive and civil, please join the discussion on the devguide on "listing terms which should be avoided": https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/605 While it's not easy to give an exhaustive list of terms which should be avoided, IMO it would prevent future discussion like this thread. I'm tired of such discussion which is not constructive at all and goes nowhere. People love to take it as an opportonity to troll and quickly messages become more and more offensive. IMO https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/styleguide/inclusive... is a good example to follow: it's short and gives concrete advices for better terms. Victor -- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:16 AM Evpok Padding <evpok.padding@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
Apparently renaming a git branch to follow the general convention is now an unbearable outrage.
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name. This is a *political* move made for *political* reasons, and has consequences downstream. Why is it so important to cause actual real problems for no reason other than to feel good about one insignificant piece of language - and, as Steve pointed out, not even the most significant one? Let's take ChainMap as an example. Would you propose renaming it in Python 3.11? Would there be pushback against such a proposal? Things in the Python standard library, when renamed, can have aliases to ensure backward compatibility. Can you do that with a branch rename? What plans are there to ensure that scripts and tooling can work on both sides of such a rename? Why has there been no discussion of the technical implications of this change prior to now? ChrisA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Angelico" <rosuav@gmail.com> To: "Python-Dev" <python-dev@python.org> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 4:20:19 PM Subject: [Python-Dev] Re: Steering Council update for February
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:16 AM Evpok Padding <evpok.padding@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
Apparently renaming a git branch to follow the general convention is now an unbearable outrage.
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name.
The git project is working on that for a long time and the default will be switched at some point: https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2006091126540.482@ZVAVAG-DN14R... Gitlab is also transitioning. It was changed in all the Fedora's repositories as well.
This is a *political* move made for *political* reasons, and has consequences downstream. Why is it so important to cause actual real problems for no reason other than to feel good about one insignificant piece of language - and, as Steve pointed out, not even the most significant one?
Let's take ChainMap as an example. Would you propose renaming it in Python 3.11? Would there be pushback against such a proposal? Things in the Python standard library, when renamed, can have aliases to ensure backward compatibility. Can you do that with a branch rename? What plans are there to ensure that scripts and tooling can work on both sides of such a rename?
On Fedora we use a git symbolic reference for the old branches.
Why has there been no discussion of the technical implications of this change prior to now?
ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/4VZ7GM6E... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Regards, Charalampos Stratakis Software Engineer Python Maintenance Team, Red Hat
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 2:48 AM Charalampos Stratakis <cstratak@redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Angelico" <rosuav@gmail.com> To: "Python-Dev" <python-dev@python.org> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 4:20:19 PM Subject: [Python-Dev] Re: Steering Council update for February
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:16 AM Evpok Padding <evpok.padding@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
Apparently renaming a git branch to follow the general convention is now an unbearable outrage.
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name.
The git project is working on that for a long time and the default will be switched at some point: https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2006091126540.482@ZVAVAG-DN14R...
Okay, I wasn't aware of that. Although that is still notable in that it spends a LOT of time talking about the technical consequences of the change. If there were no negative consequences (maybe if this were a greenfield project, or if it happened at the same time as a much larger change like hg->git), it wouldn't make a lot of difference, and go ahead, let the political argument sway the decision. But I detest political changes being forced on everyone when they bring immeasurable benefit in nontechnical areas, while having baggage of actual real problems with actual real compatibility issues. ChrisA
On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 02:20 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name.
I agree, not yet. But I think the writing is on the wall that this will be the new convention.
This is a *political* move made for *political* reasons, and has consequences downstream. Why is it so important to cause actual real problems for no reason other than to feel good about one insignificant piece of language - and, as Steve pointed out, not even the most significant one?
I don't see this so much as "feel good" as much as "fit in". I do not appreciate the cost of fitting-in though in this case. To elaborate, there are words we would clearly not use when naming branches, modules, classes, etc. I don't think this list is fixed; I think it changes with the times, and if we value our community, then our community's (changing) standards should figure into our choices. Paul
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name.
I agree, not yet. But I think the writing is on the wall that this will be the new convention.
FYI for accuracy the git installer includes an option to change the default branch name with a notice that there will be an upcoming change to have the default name be something more inclusive: https://sfconservancy.org/news/2020/jun/23/gitbranchname/ . This notice appears to predate Github's announcement of the change of name of the default branch: https://github.com/github/renaming Damian (he/him) On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:56 PM Paul Bryan <pbryan@anode.ca> wrote:
On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 02:20 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
It is NOT a general convention. It is a push by Microsoft (owners of GitHub). Outside of GitHub, the git command still uses "master" as the default name.
I agree, not yet. But I think the writing is on the wall that this will be the new convention.
This is a *political* move made for *political* reasons, and has consequences downstream. Why is it so important to cause actual real problems for no reason other than to feel good about one insignificant piece of language - and, as Steve pointed out, not even the most significant one?
I don't see this so much as "feel good" as much as "fit in". I do not appreciate the cost of fitting-in though in this case.
To elaborate, there are words we would clearly not use when naming branches, modules, classes, etc. I don't think this list is fixed; I think it changes with the times, and if we value our community, then our community's (changing) standards should figure into our choices.
Paul
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/LYMQXOKK... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Evpok, did you think I was joking? I think it is a terrible thing for you to accuse me of being "derogatory" and threaten me with the CoC because I have said we need to do better. It sounds like you are making light of the real pain people are suffering, every bit as real if not more so than that caused by the use of "master". Every one of us needs to ask why we are in favour of renaming the master branch to main but not the other examples. Are we "following the general convention" (Evpok's words) to just follow the crowd and be like everyone else, or because you want to actually help people? It is things like your reaction, and Victor's, and David's, that gives ammunition to people who say that this is just performative virtue signalling. Someone who isn't one of the "in group" points out that words you use are every equally bit as harmful as "master", and you're hostile and negative and raising the CoC. -- Steve
participants (25)
-
Antoine Pitrou -
Barry Warsaw -
Brian Curtin -
Carol Willing -
Charalampos Stratakis -
Chris Angelico -
Christian Heimes -
Damian Shaw -
David Mertz -
Edwin Zimmerman -
Evpok Padding -
Filipe Laíns -
Inada Naoki -
Ivan Pozdeev -
Jeff Allen -
Jonathan Cronin -
Mariatta -
Mike Miller -
MRAB -
Pablo Galindo Salgado -
Paul Bryan -
Steven D'Aprano -
Terry Reedy -
Titus Brown -
Victor Stinner