Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Russell Keith-Magee]

Hi Justin,

This email thread was not Meira's only contribution to the debate. In my
opinion, if you take the rest of her contributions into account, and the
general direction the debate was taking at the time, a reminder to her and
others about the existence and consequences of the code of conduct was
entirely justified.

Yours,
Russ Magee %-)



On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:38 AM, Justin Holmes 
wrote:

> Although Meira's comments are disagreeable to me, and in at least one case
> clearly factually incorrect, she has not come close to violating the code
> of conduct.  Nor has she been particularly disrespectful.  To even talk
> abut banning her is absurd, particularly in a thread whose subject is
> developing inclusive language.
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss 
> wrote:
>
>> Meira, your position has been made abundantly clear, and now your
>> behavior is treading dangerously close to the line. I'll remind you and
>> others of our community's code of conduct (
>> https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/), which specifically requires
>> that we be welcoming, friendly, patient, and respectful. Meira, you're not
>> doing a great job on any of these, specifically the respect.
>>
>> Again you've made your point, and thank you for it. We all know where you
>> stand. Now it's time for you to withdraw from this thread.
>>
>> I don't want to ban you from the list, but I will if I need to.
>>
>> Jacob
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Meira  wrote:
>>
>>> I meant legally, of course. It is illegal now. Should we ban the word
>>> "drugstore" too, maybe?
>>>
>>> I previously pointed out that I'm aware of the fact that there still is
>>> slavery in one form or another. I also mentioned that I don't believe this
>>> change made django more attractive for any of the current slaves.
>>> Not even single slave's life was in any way improved by a free person
>>> complaining about a server being called "slave".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:16:27 AM UTC+7, Alex_Gaynor wrote:




 On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira  wrote:

> I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both
> sides, not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who
> thumb up are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
> If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's
> a sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me,
> "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many
> bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically)
> slavery, too.
>
> I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who
> exactly was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a
> slave who started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the
> American historical guilt playing a huge role here.
>
> It's an old misconception, it seems that if we change the words, we'll
> change the reality. By banning the word "slave", you cannot cancel the 
> fact
> that for many years, black people in the US were treated worse than
> animals. I don't think that an attempt to forget that fact by aggressively
> labeling words as "racist" is "inclusive" or "positive".
> I actually think that remembering bad things that are now history
> should encourage people to be a little nicer to each other at the moment.
>
> We had slavery, and now we don't. It has nothing to do with databases
> :)
>
>
 This is factually incorrect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#
 Present_day


>
>
>
> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:54:16 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is
>> not,
>> >in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the
>> last
>> >week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people
>> trying
>> >to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.
>>  And
>> >when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side
>> of
>> >inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.
>>
>> If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I
>> would consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it.
>>
>> Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of
>> course.
>>
>> Daniele
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to 

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Justin Holmes]

OK, I guess I'll weigh in on the substance.

The thing about "master" and "slave" is not (or at least not only) that
they refer to a sociopolitical configuration that is objectionable (for
example, the institutionally racist forms of slavery that have occurred in
many parts of the world throughout history).  It's that the interpersonal
dynamic of "master" and "slave" is itself abhorrent, absent its
implications or reminders.

On one hand, I am OK with regarding a machine (say, a database server) as
an utter servant.  I want a future in which machines are not granted the
leeways that humans have in the names of liberty and justice.  It's not
difficult to imagine a number of dystopic scenarios built atop a world in
which machine sovereignty is a trojan horse.

On the other hand, the words "master" and "slave," as they refer to
distributed database systems, are not actual a reference to the roles of
machines, but instead are a metaphor to describe our belief about how this
abstraction is to be regarded.  In this sense, "master" and "slave" are not
particularly accurate.  The other suggestions on these two threads all
communicate a more expressive metaphor for the way we want distributed
databases to work.

Finally (albeit perhaps tangentially), it is telling that, almost without
exception, detractors from this change regard slavery as either having
ended, being now illegal, or being something other than a really big deal.
Slavery, even in the United States, is not illegal.   The 13th amendment to
the US constitution specifically includes an exception to the ban on
slavery, allowing it "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted."  There are currently more people - and more
people of color - living under slavery of this type now than at any point
prior to the civil war.  Of these, an abhorrently large number are subject
to this condition as "punishment for crime" which many if not all of us can
agree is not justly regarded as a crime at all.

If, in some small way, this shift in language can signal that we regard not
only the historical implications of the word "slave" but in fact the very
relationship structure described by "slave" and "master," we've done a good
thing.


On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Justin Holmes 
wrote:

> Although Meira's comments are disagreeable to me, and in at least one case
> clearly factually incorrect, she has not come close to violating the code
> of conduct.  Nor has she been particularly disrespectful.  To even talk
> abut banning her is absurd, particularly in a thread whose subject is
> developing inclusive language.
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss 
> wrote:
>
>> Meira, your position has been made abundantly clear, and now your
>> behavior is treading dangerously close to the line. I'll remind you and
>> others of our community's code of conduct (
>> https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/), which specifically requires
>> that we be welcoming, friendly, patient, and respectful. Meira, you're not
>> doing a great job on any of these, specifically the respect.
>>
>> Again you've made your point, and thank you for it. We all know where you
>> stand. Now it's time for you to withdraw from this thread.
>>
>> I don't want to ban you from the list, but I will if I need to.
>>
>> Jacob
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Meira  wrote:
>>
>>> I meant legally, of course. It is illegal now. Should we ban the word
>>> "drugstore" too, maybe?
>>>
>>> I previously pointed out that I'm aware of the fact that there still is
>>> slavery in one form or another. I also mentioned that I don't believe this
>>> change made django more attractive for any of the current slaves.
>>> Not even single slave's life was in any way improved by a free person
>>> complaining about a server being called "slave".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:16:27 AM UTC+7, Alex_Gaynor wrote:




 On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira  wrote:

> I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both
> sides, not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who
> thumb up are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
> If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's
> a sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me,
> "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many
> bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically)
> slavery, too.
>
> I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who
> exactly was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a
> slave who started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the
> American historical guilt playing a huge role here.
>
> It's an old misconception, it seems that if we 

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Justin Holmes]

Although Meira's comments are disagreeable to me, and in at least one case
clearly factually incorrect, she has not come close to violating the code
of conduct.  Nor has she been particularly disrespectful.  To even talk
abut banning her is absurd, particularly in a thread whose subject is
developing inclusive language.


On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss 
wrote:

> Meira, your position has been made abundantly clear, and now your behavior
> is treading dangerously close to the line. I'll remind you and others of
> our community's code of conduct (https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/),
> which specifically requires that we be welcoming, friendly, patient, and
> respectful. Meira, you're not doing a great job on any of these,
> specifically the respect.
>
> Again you've made your point, and thank you for it. We all know where you
> stand. Now it's time for you to withdraw from this thread.
>
> I don't want to ban you from the list, but I will if I need to.
>
> Jacob
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Meira  wrote:
>
>> I meant legally, of course. It is illegal now. Should we ban the word
>> "drugstore" too, maybe?
>>
>> I previously pointed out that I'm aware of the fact that there still is
>> slavery in one form or another. I also mentioned that I don't believe this
>> change made django more attractive for any of the current slaves.
>> Not even single slave's life was in any way improved by a free person
>> complaining about a server being called "slave".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:16:27 AM UTC+7, Alex_Gaynor wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira  wrote:
>>>
 I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both
 sides, not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who
 thumb up are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
 If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's a
 sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me,
 "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many
 bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically)
 slavery, too.

 I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who exactly
 was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a slave who
 started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the American
 historical guilt playing a huge role here.

 It's an old misconception, it seems that if we change the words, we'll
 change the reality. By banning the word "slave", you cannot cancel the fact
 that for many years, black people in the US were treated worse than
 animals. I don't think that an attempt to forget that fact by aggressively
 labeling words as "racist" is "inclusive" or "positive".
 I actually think that remembering bad things that are now history
 should encourage people to be a little nicer to each other at the moment.

 We had slavery, and now we don't. It has nothing to do with databases :)


>>> This is factually incorrect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#
>>> Present_day
>>>
>>>



 On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:54:16 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:

> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton  wrote:
>
> >Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is
> not,
> >in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the
> last
> >week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people
> trying
> >to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.
>  And
> >when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side
> of
> >inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.
>
> If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I
> would consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it.
>
> Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of
> course.
>
> Daniele
>
>  --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
 Groups "Django developers" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
 an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com.

 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
 To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
 msgid/django-developers/4da37237-adb4-49bd-b710-
 280dda186aea%40googlegroups.com
 
 .

 For more options, visit 

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Jacob Kaplan-Moss]

Meira, your position has been made abundantly clear, and now your behavior
is treading dangerously close to the line. I'll remind you and others of
our community's code of conduct (https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/),
which specifically requires that we be welcoming, friendly, patient, and
respectful. Meira, you're not doing a great job on any of these,
specifically the respect.

Again you've made your point, and thank you for it. We all know where you
stand. Now it's time for you to withdraw from this thread.

I don't want to ban you from the list, but I will if I need to.

Jacob


On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Meira  wrote:

> I meant legally, of course. It is illegal now. Should we ban the word
> "drugstore" too, maybe?
>
> I previously pointed out that I'm aware of the fact that there still is
> slavery in one form or another. I also mentioned that I don't believe this
> change made django more attractive for any of the current slaves.
> Not even single slave's life was in any way improved by a free person
> complaining about a server being called "slave".
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:16:27 AM UTC+7, Alex_Gaynor wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira  wrote:
>>
>>> I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both sides,
>>> not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who thumb up
>>> are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
>>> If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's a
>>> sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me,
>>> "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many
>>> bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically)
>>> slavery, too.
>>>
>>> I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who exactly
>>> was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a slave who
>>> started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the American
>>> historical guilt playing a huge role here.
>>>
>>> It's an old misconception, it seems that if we change the words, we'll
>>> change the reality. By banning the word "slave", you cannot cancel the fact
>>> that for many years, black people in the US were treated worse than
>>> animals. I don't think that an attempt to forget that fact by aggressively
>>> labeling words as "racist" is "inclusive" or "positive".
>>> I actually think that remembering bad things that are now history should
>>> encourage people to be a little nicer to each other at the moment.
>>>
>>> We had slavery, and now we don't. It has nothing to do with databases :)
>>>
>>>
>> This is factually incorrect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#
>> Present_day
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:54:16 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>>>
 On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton  wrote:

 >Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is
 not,
 >in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the
 last
 >week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people
 trying
 >to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.
  And
 >when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side
 of
 >inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.

 If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I
 would consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it.

 Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of
 course.

 Daniele

  --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Django developers" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com.
>>>
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
>>> msgid/django-developers/4da37237-adb4-49bd-b710-
>>> 280dda186aea%40googlegroups.com
>>> .
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> --
>> "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
>> to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
>> "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
>> GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084
>>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this 

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Meira]

I meant legally, of course. It is illegal now. Should we ban the word 
"drugstore" too, maybe?

I previously pointed out that I'm aware of the fact that there still is 
slavery in one form or another. I also mentioned that I don't believe this 
change made django more attractive for any of the current slaves.
Not even single slave's life was in any way improved by a free person 
complaining about a server being called "slave".




On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:16:27 AM UTC+7, Alex_Gaynor wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira wrote:
>
>> I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both sides, 
>> not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who thumb up 
>> are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
>> If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's a 
>> sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me, 
>> "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many 
>> bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically) 
>> slavery, too.
>>
>> I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who exactly 
>> was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a slave who 
>> started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the American 
>> historical guilt playing a huge role here.
>>
>> It's an old misconception, it seems that if we change the words, we'll 
>> change the reality. By banning the word "slave", you cannot cancel the fact 
>> that for many years, black people in the US were treated worse than 
>> animals. I don't think that an attempt to forget that fact by aggressively 
>> labeling words as "racist" is "inclusive" or "positive".
>> I actually think that remembering bad things that are now history should 
>> encourage people to be a little nicer to each other at the moment.
>>
>> We had slavery, and now we don't. It has nothing to do with databases :)
>>
>>
> This is factually incorrect: 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Present_day
>  
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:54:16 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton  wrote: 
>>>
>>> >Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is 
>>> not, 
>>> >in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the last 
>>> >week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people 
>>> trying 
>>> >to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.  And 
>>> >when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side of 
>>> >inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on. 
>>>
>>> If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I 
>>> would consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it. 
>>>
>>> Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of 
>>> course. 
>>>
>>> Daniele 
>>>
>>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Django developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to 
>> django-d...@googlegroups.com
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/4da37237-adb4-49bd-b710-280dda186aea%40googlegroups.com
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> Alex
>
> -- 
> "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right 
> to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
> "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
> GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/6b9c68a2-01e2-433f-a442-16d4bd8ba51e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Alex Gaynor]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Meira  wrote:

> I think it makes more sense to count reasonable arguments of both sides,
> not the people who thumb up in the comments (by the way, those who thumb up
> are mostly Americans, isn't that discrimination?)
> If using the word "slave" is immediately associated with racism, it's a
> sign that we might have too many Americans in the topic, because for me,
> "slave" is not equal to "black slave". Maybe it's because we have too many
> bears and too few black folks in my country, but we did have (practically)
> slavery, too.
>
> I also have a problem with the phrase "inclusive language". Who exactly
> was "included" by this change? I highly doubt that there was a slave who
> started using django after the change. It seems to me, it's the American
> historical guilt playing a huge role here.
>
> It's an old misconception, it seems that if we change the words, we'll
> change the reality. By banning the word "slave", you cannot cancel the fact
> that for many years, black people in the US were treated worse than
> animals. I don't think that an attempt to forget that fact by aggressively
> labeling words as "racist" is "inclusive" or "positive".
> I actually think that remembering bad things that are now history should
> encourage people to be a little nicer to each other at the moment.
>
> We had slavery, and now we don't. It has nothing to do with databases :)
>
>
This is factually incorrect:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Present_day


>
>
>
> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:54:16 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton  wrote:
>>
>> >Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is
>> not,
>> >in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the last
>> >week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people
>> trying
>> >to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.  And
>> >when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side of
>> >inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.
>>
>> If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I
>> would consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it.
>>
>> Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of course.
>>
>> Daniele
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/4da37237-adb4-49bd-b710-280dda186aea%40googlegroups.com
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Alex

-- 
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFRnB2Um3VxNPx8%3DzxKSOQCk272CKv5nBBjSTJswYBO4jCOmLQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Daniele Procida]

On Tue, May 27, 2014, Andromeda Yelton  wrote:

>Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is not,
>in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the last
>week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people trying
>to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.  And
>when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side of
>inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.

If we get a single more person contributing to Django as a result, I would 
consider this whole episode as being entirely worth it.

Not that I think it's a sustainable strategy in the long term, of course.

Daniele

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20140527165404.1260764507%40mail.wservices.ch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Andromeda Yelton]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Florian Apolloner
wrote:

> To be honest, looking at the PR the "many community members" probably
> reduce to a number countable with all of my fingers.
>

Of the first 150 distinct commenters, 120 support the change (including
everyone who is recognizably a person of color), 23 oppose, and 7 take
unclear stances.  (After that point it starts degenerating into too much
4chan for me to bother counting.)

Which is a little beside the point as the process for merging PRs is not,
in fact, democracy.  But is also fantastic, because I've spent the last
week reading TRAC and hanging out here and talking to lots of people trying
to figure out if Django will be a safe place for me to contribute.  And
when I see that large a fraction of commenters come down on the side of
inclusivity, I feel like "django developer" is a hat I can put on.

Cheers. \o/ \o/ \o/

Andromeda

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFE1XCZG9rotKW-R4VEfDyY%3DRncUcCg0sw-3M8NMbes-686xpg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

[Hannu Krosing]

On 05/27/2014 06:07 PM, Meira wrote:
> It seems to be, there are enough reasonable people leaving comments
> like this one:
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2720#issuecomment-44296843
Hi Meira

Unfortunately I have to agree, that calling some people "primaries" and
some "replicas" is a serious insult to both.

Cheers
Hannu
>
> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:47:02 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote:
>
> >> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone
> (even you!)
> >> was welcome to give their opinion.
> >>
> >
> >That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the
> course of
> >whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly
> better than
> >the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted.
>
> A human being saw the patch, made the judgement in good faith that
> it should be accepted into core, and merged it.
>
> I don't really see why you say that "why" is the question - it
> doesn't seem a very important one.
>
> Daniele
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> .
> To post to this group, send email to
> django-developers@googlegroups.com
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/cc3e6931-4709-4dbd-9508-6a20e3636bc0%40googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5384BB41.4020002%40krosing.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[James Bennett]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Meira  wrote:

> It seems to be, there are enough reasonable people leaving comments like
> this one: https://github.com/django/django/pull/2720#issuecomment-44296843
>

We'll just get the databases to change their terminology before we change
ours!

Of course, the DB folks will get reasonable comments saying they should
wait until the tools that integrate with the DBs change *their*
documentation...

And thus we have an example of a mutually-recursive function. *Somebody*
has to move first, and actually move rather than say "I'll move when those
other people do". We decided to go ahead and move on this one.

For the record I am strongly against reverting at this point -- and I'm
saying that as someone whose initial reaction to the pull request was "oh,
a troll" until I looked more into who had submitted it. With well-written
documentation, any confusion that's produced should be slight and
momentary, and I'm OK with that as the tradeoff of using less-charged
language.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAL13Cg9i%2Bt3P1AnT6Q7NDX%2BPHjP6jTnhRDHy5BcdF9gcDkUf%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Meira]

It seems to be, there are enough reasonable people leaving comments like 
this one: https://github.com/django/django/pull/2720#issuecomment-44296843

On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:47:02 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote: 
>
> >> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even 
> you!) 
> >> was welcome to give their opinion. 
> >> 
> > 
> >That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the course of 
> >whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly better 
> than 
> >the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted. 
>
> A human being saw the patch, made the judgement in good faith that it 
> should be accepted into core, and merged it. 
>
> I don't really see why you say that "why" is the question - it doesn't 
> seem a very important one. 
>
> Daniele 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/cc3e6931-4709-4dbd-9508-6a20e3636bc0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Daniele Procida]

On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote:

>> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even you!) 
>> was welcome to give their opinion. 
>>
>
>That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the course of 
>whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly better than 
>the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted. 

A human being saw the patch, made the judgement in good faith that it should be 
accepted into core, and merged it.

I don't really see why you say that "why" is the question - it doesn't seem a 
very important one.

Daniele

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20140527154651.1054375592%40smtpauth.cf.ac.uk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Florian Apolloner]

On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 5:38:23 PM UTC+2, Meira wrote:
>
> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even you!) 
>> was welcome to give their opinion. 
>>
>
> That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the course of 
> whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly better than 
> the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted.
>

Cause a committer (Alex in that case) agreed with the rationale outlined in 
the PR.
 

> Given that the current wording reflects consensus in the core team, you 
>> can assume that it won't be changed. 
>>
> Given that the current wording is less clear than "master/slave" and many 
> community member are against this change, I think that the issue is worth 
> discussing a bit more.
> (Here is a comment confirming the assumption: 
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2694#discussion_r12865261)
>

To be honest, looking at the PR the "many community members" probably 
reduce to a number countable with all of my fingers. And even if not, 
"many" are okay with the change or like it -- and I strongly doubt that we 
will find a real consensus here… 

Cheers,
Florian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/27bc7ce5-7360-41c5-9e4f-c09928f28bba%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Alex Gaynor]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Meira  wrote:

> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even you!)
>> was welcome to give their opinion.
>>
>
> That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the course of
> whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly better than
> the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted.
>

> Whatever happened after the trolling began doesn't matter. At this point
>> it's impossible to tell concern from trolling.
>>
> Well, I'm claiming that the first commit that proposed the leader/follower
> pair *was *trolling.
>
>

It's not, the person who submitted that PR has been a contributing member
of the Django community for years.


> Given that the current wording reflects consensus in the core team, you
>> can assume that it won't be changed.
>>
> Given that the current wording is less clear than "master/slave" and many
> community member are against this change, I think that the issue is worth
> discussing a bit more.
> (Here is a comment confirming the assumption:
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2694#discussion_r12865261)
>

Many people from 4chan are trolling, please don't confuse them.

>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/aaee8850-e135-44fd-8821-d0c3bd8fe423%40googlegroups.com
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Alex

-- 
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFRnB2V-jauxCz_%2BY2ae3xOQAOEnWtWj7gxvO6AzvyXVgh0W9Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Meira]

>
> This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even you!) 
> was welcome to give their opinion. 
>

That's all nice and good, but why is the discussion taking the course of 
whether or not we're accepting the second commit? It is clearly better than 
the first. The question is, why the first commit was accepted. 

Whatever happened after the trolling began doesn't matter. At this point 
> it's impossible to tell concern from trolling. 
>
Well, I'm claiming that the first commit that proposed the leader/follower 
pair *was *trolling.
 

> Given that the current wording reflects consensus in the core team, you 
> can assume that it won't be changed. 
>
Given that the current wording is less clear than "master/slave" and many 
community member are against this change, I think that the issue is worth 
discussing a bit more.
(Here is a comment confirming the assumption: 
https://github.com/django/django/pull/2694#discussion_r12865261)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/aaee8850-e135-44fd-8821-d0c3bd8fe423%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Aymeric Augustin]

In the interest of giving the full story to those who're genuinely worried that 
core devs don't give a fuck about the community — community being defined as 
the people who discovered this change on django-updates, not on 4chan or Hacker 
News...

> Le 27 mai 2014 à 16:24, Meira  a écrit :
> 
> I would suggest that leaving names the way they have been since a long time 
> is the best option. I.e. revert the changes made, give the community a little 
> time to think about it, and then incorporate the change most people can agree 
> on.

That's what happened just after the initial commit. A few days later the naming 
was changed to "primary / replica". 

This second commit was discussed in a Trac ticket and everyone (even you!) was 
welcome to give their opinion.

IIRC 7 core devs weighed in on the Trac ticket or on IRC, making it the most 
discussed change in Diango this year.

Whatever happened after the trolling began doesn't matter. At this point it's 
impossible to tell concern from trolling.

Given that the current wording reflects consensus in the core team, you can 
assume that it won't be changed.

That's why your pull request was rejected.

-- 
Aymeric.




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/2F6E78F7-E653-4E3F-8E56-540567D7FA12%40polytechnique.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Meira]

I appreciate your reply very much! And sure it's not wise to rename things 
every time someone asks for it, even when it's a lot of people. But same 
applies to the original renaming commit, doesnt it?

I would suggest that leaving names the way they have been since a long time 
is the best option. I.e. revert the changes made, give the community a 
little time to think about it, and then incorporate the change most people 
can agree on.
Saying the change has been made and now it's too late defies the very 
concept of version control. Reminder: we are using git. It can never be 
"too late" :)


On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 8:44:13 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote: 
>
> >Sorry, I accidentally sent a private reply :) I'll try to repeat it here 
> >for others. 
>
> I have replied, privately, but I wanted to add publicly: 
>
> >The community is trying to protect the django project from the attack of 
> >people who seek no good for django. Please stop the confrontation, this 
> >will not help anyone. The feedback from the community is the most 
> valuable 
> >thing django has, do not ignore it. 
>
> We won't - I promise. The feedback - even when it's expressed testily or 
> in exasperation - is not just appreciated, but received gratefully. The 
> same goes for patches or contributions, *including the ones that are not 
> accepted*. 
>
> The Django Project and the Django community are not in my mind two 
> different things. 
>
> >Calling me angry, uncivil, referring to my way of putting things as 
> >inappropriate, suggesting that my tone might disengage people - those are 
> >signs of your own anger, if I may suggest. I made no assumptions about 
> you 
> >personally or any other of the django maintainers, and I would appreciate 
> >if you adopt a similar approach. 
>
> You are right and I apologise for making those remarks. 
>
> Daniele 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/d0a8ae0d-b9ae-4cf8-b757-153e3ac74a9e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Daniele Procida]

On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote:

>Sorry, I accidentally sent a private reply :) I'll try to repeat it here 
>for others.

I have replied, privately, but I wanted to add publicly:

>The community is trying to protect the django project from the attack of 
>people who seek no good for django. Please stop the confrontation, this 
>will not help anyone. The feedback from the community is the most valuable 
>thing django has, do not ignore it.

We won't - I promise. The feedback - even when it's expressed testily or in 
exasperation - is not just appreciated, but received gratefully. The same goes 
for patches or contributions, *including the ones that are not accepted*.

The Django Project and the Django community are not in my mind two different 
things.

>Calling me angry, uncivil, referring to my way of putting things as 
>inappropriate, suggesting that my tone might disengage people - those are 
>signs of your own anger, if I may suggest. I made no assumptions about you 
>personally or any other of the django maintainers, and I would appreciate 
>if you adopt a similar approach.

You are right and I apologise for making those remarks.

Daniele

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20140527134354.57359246%40smtpauth.cf.ac.uk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: "Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Meira]

Sorry, I accidentally sent a private reply :) I'll try to repeat it here 
for others.

Those silly pictures are the community's emotional reply to an issue that 
they care about. I don't think calling the contributors "silly" is exactly 
politically correct, too, since we are on that level now :)

I requested to revert the changes for the exact reason that you're giving 
me: the discussion should happen *before* any changes are made.

I call the original change "trolling", because that's what I believe it is. 
This is not the first case of political correctness trolling on github, FSF 
in particular has a history of doing that with other projects. I do not 
believe any of the "political correct" changes were made with the goal of 
bettering the project, I think the only goal of such is to start a holywar 
discussion and have fun. Multiple comments on github assert that I'm not 
the only one aware of the spreading trolling, particularly from 4chan users.
The community is trying to protect the django project from the attack of 
people who seek no good for django. Please stop the confrontation, this 
will not help anyone. The feedback from the community is the most valuable 
thing django has, do not ignore it.

Offtopic:
Calling me angry, uncivil, referring to my way of putting things as 
inappropriate, suggesting that my tone might disengage people - those are 
signs of your own anger, if I may suggest. I made no assumptions about you 
personally or any other of the django maintainers, and I would appreciate 
if you adopt a similar approach.
I argue that stating my opinion honestly and persistently is not a sign of 
me being angry. You can call me harsh if that's what you think. I see no 
point in avoiding words that pinpoint exactly what I mean.



On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 7:35:26 PM UTC+7, Daniele Procida wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote: 
>
> >As some of you may have notice, a hot discussion is happening in the 
> >comments of this pull request: https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692 
>
> If by "hot discussion" you mean silly pictures and noisy accusations... 
>
> There is a discussion to be had about this subject, which is why you were 
> invited to start one. 
>
> You're clearly very angry about it, I don't know why, but if you'd like 
> other people to participate in your discussion I suggest you stop making 
> uncivil remarks in it - like "trolling" and "insane" - and state your case 
> in a way that makes people feel like discussing it with you. 
>
> Please understand that if you're not able to moderate your own tone, you 
> will not be permitted to post to this email list. 
>
> Daniele 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/8950e13f-11e4-4e49-ada6-92919705c529%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

"Master/slave terminology" (was: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch)

[Daniele Procida]

On Tue, May 27, 2014, Meira  wrote:

>As some of you may have notice, a hot discussion is happening in the 
>comments of this pull request: https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692

If by "hot discussion" you mean silly pictures and noisy accusations...

There is a discussion to be had about this subject, which is why you were 
invited to start one.

You're clearly very angry about it, I don't know why, but if you'd like other 
people to participate in your discussion I suggest you stop making uncivil 
remarks in it - like "trolling" and "insane" - and state your case in a way 
that makes people feel like discussing it with you.

Please understand that if you're not able to moderate your own tone, you will 
not be permitted to post to this email list.

Daniele

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20140527123513.196257966%40smtpauth.cf.ac.uk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.