Seconded. Think it’s better to explain why the terminology was changed than to pretend it never happened.
> On 19 May 2021, at 07:08, 'Gavin Mogan' via Jenkins Developers > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm actually against updating the changelog. The changes to terminology were > not done then, and by showing the old and the new, you show growth. I'm not a > fan of rewriting history, even in git. > >> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 8:59 PM Mark Waite <[email protected]> wrote: >> I like the idea of updating changelogs where possible, though it may be more >> complicated than pure text replacement, especially when a string is used to >> describe something from the user interface. >> >>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 7:21 AM Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> My vote is for updating changelogs where possible. Less obsolete >>> terminology entries we have, the better for everyone. Of course >>> retrospectively changing things like whitelisted-classes.txt filename for >>> JEP-200 is not an option. But it is fine to do it where you just have text >>> or Web UI controls. For the latter ones we might need to cleanup >>> documentation and changelogs in parallel with the updates of changelogs. >>> >>> (@Angélique: thanks :P) >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:59 PM Angélique Jard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hello, what do you think about changing terminology in changelogs ? The >>>> topic has been raised on Jira comment here: >>>> https://issues.jenkins.io/browse/JENKINS-65398?focusedCommentId=408976&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-408976 >>>> >>>> I was not doing it because changing the past didn't seems accurate, but I >>>> don't have a strong opinion, I would say "why not". Does anyone has some >>>> opinion on that ? >>>> >>>> (@Oleg: I love that board by the way :D ) >>>> >>>>> On Monday, May 17, 2021 at 11:51:06 PM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote: >>>>> Do we have any terms we'd like to finalize during the next meeting? >>>>> I have also created https://github.com/orgs/jenkinsci/projects/5 to track >>>>> the related pull requests and to see where any help is needed >>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, May 6, 2021 at 10:12:31 AM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We made decisions on a few terms at the yesterday's governance meeting: >>>>>> Master node => "Built-in Node" >>>>>> "master" label => "built-in" // We will use it unless we discover a >>>>>> technical issue with the hyphen. Then we fallback to “builtin” >>>>>> “Master branch” in documentation and help => "default branch" >>>>>> Agent-to-Master security => " Agent-to-Controller security " >>>>>> "Jenkins master container " => "Jenkins controller container" >>>>>> "Serialization whitelist" for JEP-200 => "serialization allowlist" >>>>>> We also agreed that we will be using "allowlist" in our terminology, not >>>>>> the "permitlist" as it was suggested in a few occasions. We have not >>>>>> finalized decisions on other terms, including the "Jenkins master pod". >>>>>> I raised https://github.com/jenkinsci/kubernetes-operator/issues/561 in >>>>>> the Jenkins operator project to track the change on its side once we >>>>>> agree on the term. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone is interested, I can create a global "terminology cleanup" >>>>>> project in the jenkinsci organization. It will allow tracking pull >>>>>> request better on the GitHub's side >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Oleg Nenashev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 12:02:42 PM UTC+2 Daniel Beck wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > On 4. May 2021, at 16:59, Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > • Master node => "Built-in Node" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To provide a bit of context for this one for those that don't remember >>>>>>> from last year :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Before, there was no real distinction between "Jenkins master, the >>>>>>> process" (mostly) and "Jenkins master, the node". When I worked on the >>>>>>> PR in which I started cleaning up the terms, it became apparent a >>>>>>> different term could be useful.[1] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A simple example: The built-in node can be offline while the controller >>>>>>> is otherwise running. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In some code, the relation between master-specific and global node >>>>>>> properties also wasn't clear in some places because both were >>>>>>> occasionally called "master" (and only one set is inherited by agents). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's not a huge list of obvious examples because a lot of the things >>>>>>> that could matter are shared (process, file system, config file to an >>>>>>> extent) or irrelevant (node launcher). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I still think it would be useful to distinguish in terms between the >>>>>>> controller and the built-in node, if only because 'controller' for the >>>>>>> node may create wrong associations (it controlling things, rather than >>>>>>> "just" being part of the controller process). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However there are also limitations, which make a different term not an >>>>>>> obviously correct choice: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - The built-in node is part of the controller process, it shares the >>>>>>> controller's file system and OS permissions. If the built-in node is >>>>>>> doing work, the controller has load. A lot of resources are shared, so >>>>>>> "the built-in node's configuration is stored in the config.xml file >>>>>>> with most of the controller configuration on the controller file >>>>>>> system" etc. >>>>>>> - People seem to confuse executors and nodes/agents fairly regularly, >>>>>>> so may well consider these to be the same thing because the differences >>>>>>> are way less relevant than compared to agents, leading to wrong >>>>>>> documentation and other advice, possibly confusing those aware of the >>>>>>> terms. (It might help that controller as a term is getting rather well >>>>>>> established, and that the node will get labels (both UI and environment >>>>>>> var) referring to it by its new name, but who knows.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I encourage you to check out the PR with placeholder term to get a >>>>>>> sense for the differences and consider whether you think distinguishing >>>>>>> the terms is useful. As the PR is still a draft and uses an obvious >>>>>>> placeholder term, please skip doing an actual review for now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (Note that the behavior-changing code in my PR (related to migration) >>>>>>> would be needed anyway, regardless of the term we choose. It's more >>>>>>> about removing "master" than what the replacement term is.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/5425 >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/x5vdlJDvntw/unsubscribe. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/ff3dbd9b-8f7d-476f-ad09-153d4435fb52n%40googlegroups.com. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Jenkins Developers" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPfivLBQ_MvAUyGKqA_bDN5bAdC%3D2YPUsz4apHrccNmZkaQvTw%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Jenkins Developers" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtEaCx2P5GsuRp0s78uLXa7M3V-V08ZD5vCdg0pAC5EeLA%40mail.gmail.com. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAG%3D_DutAmwT7tjK%3Di6T908R8KgRU%3DVE3Roa8sqXdqYyzhGxyXA%40mail.gmail.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/7DA92FC8-B8DD-4319-A703-6CAF4FC425EB%40gmail.com.
