On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:10:05 +0000 "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wi...@intel.com> wrote:
> >>> > >>> I'd propose instead leader lcore - there is this idea that the leader > >>> is still a member of the team and will participate in the work. > >>> > >>> Leader / worker? > >>> > >> > >> I personally doubt such changes are needed at all. > >> Code churn will be massive for both DPDK itself and related user projects. > >> With no real gain in return, from my perspective. > >> Konstantin > >> > > > > Your concern is valid but the issue does need to be addressed. > > If now when? This is as a good a time as any to do it. > > > > Increasing diversity and inclusion is an overarching goal of many > > organizations > > include my employer(Microsoft), the parent organization of DPDK(LF) > > and my values. > > > > Following values is more important than minor replacement of text in API. > > I feel like Konstantin is correct here. > > If we were using these terms for humans or groups of humans, then I would > agree they should be changed. We need to take into account the context of the > reference to these words. I agree some words should never be used in any > context, but these terms are very reasonable in the context of DPDK and > networking. Have to disagree, the words matter. This has been discussed many times. Please look at the footnotes from the Gnome post [0] - <https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mjw/Language/NonSexist/vuw.non-sexist-language-guidelines.txt>, <https://twitter.com/justkelly_ok/status/933011085594066944> [1] - <https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692> [2] - <https://bugs.python.org/issue34605> [3] - <https://github.com/rust-lang-deprecated/rust-buildbot/issues/2>, <https://github.com/rust-community/foss-events-planner/issues/58> [4] - <https://twitter.com/ISCdotORG/status/942815837299253248> [5] - <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/geary/issues/324>
