Edward Im not aware of any changes we need to make which move from standard to non standard. And as far as I know it is pretty straightforward. If we come up with equally useful or slightly better terms and somehow make the community more approachable for even a single person then I think it is a win.
Sure for some projects this might be tougher but for NiFi this seems like an easy effort. thanks On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 6:43 PM Edward Armes <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a difficult issue and causes no small amount of friction every > time. I'm personally against this for the following reassons: > > - Some of the terms proposed are not industry standard and may potentially > cause significant issue for non-english speakers. > > - For each change that is made can we guarantee that we will not lose > clarity of meaning, and then have revert the change down the line if the > change causes a drop in usage. > > - Of what percentage of people is this truly an issue for and what > percentage isn't. Any change that has the potential to cause a major split > in the community, there must be as close as possible to a majority, and not > just from those that are vocal and active on the mailing lists. > Disscustions on other groups are turning toxic, and in some cases are > potentially leading to the collapse of these projects where these changes > are being implemented with what appears to be without the agreement of a > signifficant chunk of the community. > > - From a personal perspective, I sit on the autism spectrum and have grown > up with people using words that are very offensive and have hurt me badly. > Instead of having these words as offensive and untouchable. Myself and > others have instead made these words our own and made them lose the > negative connotations they have. As such, I do find the current > disscustions deeply alarming and feels like they start to border into the > realm of censorship. > > - One final point (and potentially controversial), A good chunk of the > wording that is proposed to be changed. Is being done so on the > "modern"/"street" definition of these words and not the actual definition. > Language should change and evolve to introduce clarity, but right now does > this change improve the clarity across the engineering sector and I believe > it won't. > > Edward > > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, 01:11 Andy LoPresto, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I am a proponent of making this change and also using allow/deny list, > > meddler-in-the-middle, etc. > > > > Here is a blog [1] with easy instructions for executing the change in > git, > > although I don’t know if there is any Apache-integration specific changes > > we would also need. > > > > [1] > > > https://www.hanselman.com/blog/EasilyRenameYourGitDefaultBranchFromMasterToMain.aspx > > > > Andy LoPresto > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > He/Him > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > > On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:06 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I suspect it would be fairly easy to make this change. We do, I think, > > > have whitelist/blacklist in there somewhere but im not sure how > involved. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:04 PM Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> All, > > >> I've seen the discussion started on other projects [1][2], so I wanted > > to > > >> kick off a discussion to determine whether this is something nifi > could > > >> look at too. Allen Wittenauer's post to yetus captures the why and > some > > of > > >> the how, so rather than copy and pasting, you can take a look at what > > he's > > >> done. Thoughts? > > >> > > >> Tony > > >> > > >> 1. > > >> > > >> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd38afa9fb6c0dcd77d1a677f1152b7398b3bda93c9106b3393149d10%40%3Cdev.yetus.apache.org%3E > > >> 2. > > >> > > >> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0825eec0c84296bdab7cf898a987f06355443241ca02b2aaa51d3ef9%40%3Cdev.accumulo.apache.org%3E > > >> > > > > >
