On Fri, 2019-05-03 at 15:35 +0200, Carmen Bianca Bakker wrote: > Je ven, 2019-05-03 je 14:45 +0200, Bastien Nocera skribis: > > > <snip> > > If we agree that the "master" in the git branch name is the same > > "master" that's used in "master copy" meaning "the original", "the > > one > > medium that other copies are made from", then it's probably a > > "master/slave" relationship. > > > > There are still existing mentions of "slave copies". In short, > > "master > > copies" could have been called that because the copies made from it > > were "slave copies". > > This logic makes sense to me, thank you. That was the missing bit of > logic for me. I can get on board with that. > > Beyond just that logic, however, are there organisations who hold the > same opinion? Affected people who do? That would be immensely > valuable > as rationale for making the change, beside this somewhat semantic > argument.
I've quoted a few individuals who made this change in the original mail, but I don't have more information here. > > > The shitstorm is to be expected one way or another. The only > > > difference > > > would be whether GNOME or The Linux Foundation is smeared in > > > internet > > > comments as "SJWs changing things and I don't like it". > > > > Because you think that it would be just the organisations being > > smeared? Or that they would just be smeared? Sorry, I'm not > > courageous > > (or foolish) enough to even attempt that. > > Maybe I'm misinterpreting. You said that doing this upstream would > result in people being mad. I asserted that it's going to result in > people being mad one way or another. I did not mean or imply anything > other than that, and do not see how this statement can be interpreted > otherwise. It's mostly about the size and reach of the people "being mad", and the target audience. When GNOME adopts a full code of conduct for online behaviour (our current one is only for events), I don't expect it to cause the same sort of response from the wider community as when the Linux kernel did. Or when Python removed the "master/slave" terms from its code base. > In any case, thank you, you've convinced me. I stand by most of what > I've said, but I can kind of see the connection to the practice of > slavery more clearly. > > If the change can be done transparently (i.e., nobody needs to lift a > finger, as said in the thread), I don't have any strong objections > against the change. Otherwise I'd urge to balance the gains against > the > pains. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
