Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
> If we do rename I see the following steps: > - Rename master to main in both repositories gitbox and github. Most > probably this involves infra. > - Adapt some scripts and our documentation (WebSite, READMEs, ...) > - Change our workspaces as described in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-793 If somebody decides to spend time on all of that just to avoid *potentially* upsetting some bed-wetter, based on no evidence that it could happen, then it simply says that this project has too much time on its hands and lack of focus in its priorities. To clarify, I'm not upset with the default branch name; don't know any sane person who is. Reminder : JDO 3.2 started in 2015. We're now in 2021. I'd rather like to have a *final* API jar at some point, and not have to rely on DataNucleus own variants. I'd have hoped this would be higher priority than namings ;-) Don't reply to this mail, it only wastes further time, and I certainly won't have a hissy fit whatever you decide to do. All the best Regards -- Andy DataNucleus (Web: http://www.datanucleus.org Twitter: @datanucleus)
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
I also do not feel strongly about either name, especially (as mentioned before) because it derives from the master record analogy. If I may add something: I asked a good friend of mine (an Afro-American woman with relevant ancestry for this topic). She said that she "wouldn't bother" renaming anything in this context. She would in no way feel put off by the term 'master' or even associate it with anything bad, not least because it has many (often positive) meanings outside the historic context (e.g. master degree). TL;DR I am slightly in favor of leaving it as is, but wouldn't object if anyone wants to change it. Cheers, Til On 21/04/2021 21:36, Tobias Bouschen wrote: I don't think there is any way of making everybody happy here. No matter what we do, somebody will most likely complain. From reading the discussions you linked to, Craig, the arguments seem to go around in circles. Either it matters or doesn't matter what the etymological origin/usage/context of the usage in git is depending on the point the different sides want to make and which quotes from different prominent git developers they are referring to. Furthermore, the discussion has devolved more into a discussion about "social justice warriors" and "political correctness" than the actual topic at hand. I, personally, don't see an issue with the usage of the word "master" in this context (or at least not enough of an issue to warrant the time investment of changing the infrastructure). Even if the word were to have come from the "master/slave" terminology in BitKeeper (which is a conjecture at best), it does not really make sense in this context. The usage in the context of "master record" is a clear and fitting analogy for the concept at hand in my opinion. Reading the discussion hasn't really changed my mind in this regard. But if there are more constructive discussions/opinions on the topic that could change my view, I am definitely open to it. Links are welcome. :) So my suggestion is still the same: wait and see if there is an official stance of the Apache organization regarding the topic (which is probably unlikely) or anybody involved with the project feels strongly enough about it to warrant the change. Waiting for an Apache ruling has the added bonus of avoiding the entire discussion as we can simply defer it pointing to the "external" decision made by the Apache organization. But, if anybody else in the team feels more strongly about this topic and would like the name to change, I am not opposed to it. I just don't see any gain in doing it right now just to get ahead of the discussion (as this will only lead to complaints coming from the other side, as you have already seen). Best regards, Tobias On 4/20/21 7:44 PM, Michael Bouschen wrote: Hi Craig, I'm fine with renaming master to main and have main the default branch of our repositories. This follows what github is doing for new projects. If we do rename I see the following steps: - Rename master to main in both repositories gitbox and github. Most probably this involves infra. - Adapt some scripts and our documentation (WebSite, READMEs, ...) - Change our workspaces as described in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-793 Regards Michael Hi, I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the main branch of our repos. Here is some background reading to inform our decision. https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin/issues/113 Let's have a discussion now and vote later. Regards, Craig Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
I don't think there is any way of making everybody happy here. No matter what we do, somebody will most likely complain. From reading the discussions you linked to, Craig, the arguments seem to go around in circles. Either it matters or doesn't matter what the etymological origin/usage/context of the usage in git is depending on the point the different sides want to make and which quotes from different prominent git developers they are referring to. Furthermore, the discussion has devolved more into a discussion about "social justice warriors" and "political correctness" than the actual topic at hand. I, personally, don't see an issue with the usage of the word "master" in this context (or at least not enough of an issue to warrant the time investment of changing the infrastructure). Even if the word were to have come from the "master/slave" terminology in BitKeeper (which is a conjecture at best), it does not really make sense in this context. The usage in the context of "master record" is a clear and fitting analogy for the concept at hand in my opinion. Reading the discussion hasn't really changed my mind in this regard. But if there are more constructive discussions/opinions on the topic that could change my view, I am definitely open to it. Links are welcome. :) So my suggestion is still the same: wait and see if there is an official stance of the Apache organization regarding the topic (which is probably unlikely) or anybody involved with the project feels strongly enough about it to warrant the change. Waiting for an Apache ruling has the added bonus of avoiding the entire discussion as we can simply defer it pointing to the "external" decision made by the Apache organization. But, if anybody else in the team feels more strongly about this topic and would like the name to change, I am not opposed to it. I just don't see any gain in doing it right now just to get ahead of the discussion (as this will only lead to complaints coming from the other side, as you have already seen). Best regards, Tobias On 4/20/21 7:44 PM, Michael Bouschen wrote: Hi Craig, I'm fine with renaming master to main and have main the default branch of our repositories. This follows what github is doing for new projects. If we do rename I see the following steps: - Rename master to main in both repositories gitbox and github. Most probably this involves infra. - Adapt some scripts and our documentation (WebSite, READMEs, ...) - Change our workspaces as described in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-793 Regards Michael Hi, I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the main branch of our repos. Here is some background reading to inform our decision. https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin/issues/113 Let's have a discussion now and vote later. Regards, Craig Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi Craig, I'm fine with renaming master to main and have main the default branch of our repositories. This follows what github is doing for new projects. If we do rename I see the following steps: - Rename master to main in both repositories gitbox and github. Most probably this involves infra. - Adapt some scripts and our documentation (WebSite, READMEs, ...) - Change our workspaces as described in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-793 Regards Michael > Hi, > > I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the > main branch of our repos. > > Here is some background reading to inform our decision. > https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin/issues/113 > > Let's have a discussion now and vote later. > > Regards, > Craig > > Craig L Russell > c...@apache.org >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi Marco, I'm afraid this message is not on topic for the jdo dev mail list. We are talking about renaming a branch. This is not a slippery slope leading to the demise of the project. We are not re-litigating the history of GDR, Linus Torvalds, Liquid Democracy, or the 3rd Reich. Ciao, Craig > On Apr 20, 2021, at 12:28 AM, Marco Nguitragool wrote: > > Hi Craig, > > thanks for your reply! > > Am 19.04.21 um 22:20 schrieb Craig Russell: >> Hi Marco, >> >>> On Apr 18, 2021, at 8:54 PM, Marco Nguitragool wrote: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> please don't bow to this insanity of political correctness. Language >>> control / dictates are an important corner stone of every dictatorship. I >>> experienced this myself in the former Soviet east. I don't want to >>> experience this again and decisively object it. >> Can you share some personal experience with renaming potentially offensive >> terms to better welcome people to a project? > > I was actually talking about my experiences with the language control of the > Soviets when I used to live in the GDR (the dictatorship existing in East > Germany from 1949 until 1990). > > IMHO there is nothing offensive in any term used in software development. The > problem is solely in the people who *want* to be offended. Being offended is > their purpose of life. In certain ways they are (like) trolls: Listening to > them and reacting to them means feeding them. > > Btw. concerning the term "master": I'm a Dive Master. If someone feels > offended by this term, I'd rather not work with him, because he's soon going > to cause more and more problems. These people never get satisfied -- not even > when the core developers left and the project struggles or even fails -- then > they go on and destroy the next project. > > Most importantly at all: These people cannot contribute anything meaningful > (like good code, for example), but instead they contribute only discord > hidden in beautiful language. > > Just take a look at Linus Torvalds. He's one of the greatest of us and even > he was driven out of his project, the Linux Kernel. He returned -- but most > great devs don't and the projects finally fail. > > Some personal experience? I have none related to a software-project, because > fortunately, none of my projects was hijacked by SJWs. But I do have personal > experience of exactly the same thing in the analogue world: I was a member of > the Pirate Party when it was newly founded. This Party had revolutionary > ideas about making democracy far more democratic by using software tools. The > concept was called Liquid Democracy. > > The party was subverted by SJWs who drove out all the great nerds. They > managed to get into control of the mailing-lists and other > communication-channels and secretly censored out every communication that was > about the actual goals of the party (more democracy). Of course, more and > more people -- including me -- left and finally the party disappeared into > the abyss of insignificance. > > The same happened to many software-projects -- but I was fortunately not an > active member of any of these and thus cannot tell any personal experience. > > >>> People accepting political correctness are followers of dictatorship -- >>> leading to the worst chapters of history -- again. >> It's not clear what dictatorship has to do with renaming a Git branch. >> Perhaps you can elaborate? > > It's a very slippery road. As soon as you give in to the first of their > demands, the next demands are following faster and faster, more and more > intense. Very soon, all the great devs (who are often a bit nerdy) are driven > away and only the non-productive SJWs are left. Then they leave and destroy > the next project. > > >>> Always in history, not the evil wrong-doers are the main problem, but the >>> followers bowing to them and (at least silently) supporting them! >> I'd say evil wrong-doers are the main problem. Do you have another >> experience? > > Yes, I do have another experience. The wrong-doers are a very very small > minority. They can never get into power without the support of a large group > of followers and being tolerated by the (mostly silent) majority -- until > they have enough power to force their way. > > History is full of proofs -- just take a small subset: > > The witch hunt. Of course, I have no personal experience as this was a few > hundred years ago. But please read about it. Estimations reach from 40'000 to > 100'000 innocent people (mostly women, but also men) having been tortured and > burnt alive (or otherwise killed barbarically). > > The 3rd Reich. Not me personally, but my family. Please read Hanna Arendt -- > she's far more eloquent than me. > > The GDR. Here, I have far more than enough personal experience. If you made a > bad joke in the presense of a wrong "friend", the Stasi came and fetched you > -- interrogated you -- and if you were unlucky you
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi Craig, thanks for your reply! Am 19.04.21 um 22:20 schrieb Craig Russell: > Hi Marco, > >> On Apr 18, 2021, at 8:54 PM, Marco Nguitragool wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> please don't bow to this insanity of political correctness. Language control >> / dictates are an important corner stone of every dictatorship. I >> experienced this myself in the former Soviet east. I don't want to >> experience this again and decisively object it. > Can you share some personal experience with renaming potentially offensive > terms to better welcome people to a project? I was actually talking about my experiences with the language control of the Soviets when I used to live in the GDR (the dictatorship existing in East Germany from 1949 until 1990). IMHO there is nothing offensive in any term used in software development. The problem is solely in the people who *want* to be offended. Being offended is their purpose of life. In certain ways they are (like) trolls: Listening to them and reacting to them means feeding them. Btw. concerning the term "master": I'm a Dive Master. If someone feels offended by this term, I'd rather not work with him, because he's soon going to cause more and more problems. These people never get satisfied -- not even when the core developers left and the project struggles or even fails -- then they go on and destroy the next project. Most importantly at all: These people cannot contribute anything meaningful (like good code, for example), but instead they contribute only discord hidden in beautiful language. Just take a look at Linus Torvalds. He's one of the greatest of us and even he was driven out of his project, the Linux Kernel. He returned -- but most great devs don't and the projects finally fail. Some personal experience? I have none related to a software-project, because fortunately, none of my projects was hijacked by SJWs. But I do have personal experience of exactly the same thing in the analogue world: I was a member of the Pirate Party when it was newly founded. This Party had revolutionary ideas about making democracy far more democratic by using software tools. The concept was called Liquid Democracy. The party was subverted by SJWs who drove out all the great nerds. They managed to get into control of the mailing-lists and other communication-channels and secretly censored out every communication that was about the actual goals of the party (more democracy). Of course, more and more people -- including me -- left and finally the party disappeared into the abyss of insignificance. The same happened to many software-projects -- but I was fortunately not an active member of any of these and thus cannot tell any personal experience. >> People accepting political correctness are followers of dictatorship -- >> leading to the worst chapters of history -- again. > It's not clear what dictatorship has to do with renaming a Git branch. > Perhaps you can elaborate? It's a very slippery road. As soon as you give in to the first of their demands, the next demands are following faster and faster, more and more intense. Very soon, all the great devs (who are often a bit nerdy) are driven away and only the non-productive SJWs are left. Then they leave and destroy the next project. >> Always in history, not the evil wrong-doers are the main problem, but the >> followers bowing to them and (at least silently) supporting them! > I'd say evil wrong-doers are the main problem. Do you have another experience? Yes, I do have another experience. The wrong-doers are a very very small minority. They can never get into power without the support of a large group of followers and being tolerated by the (mostly silent) majority -- until they have enough power to force their way. History is full of proofs -- just take a small subset: The witch hunt. Of course, I have no personal experience as this was a few hundred years ago. But please read about it. Estimations reach from 40'000 to 100'000 innocent people (mostly women, but also men) having been tortured and burnt alive (or otherwise killed barbarically). The 3rd Reich. Not me personally, but my family. Please read Hanna Arendt -- she's far more eloquent than me. The GDR. Here, I have far more than enough personal experience. If you made a bad joke in the presense of a wrong "friend", the Stasi came and fetched you -- interrogated you -- and if you were unlucky you went to prison for a long long time, where you often were tortured. We were enemies of the state until we were finally kicked out by the government (our freedom was most likely "purchased" by the FRG -- Western Germany). Regards, Marco :-) > Regards, > Craig >> Regards, Marco. >> >> P.S.: I'm resending this e-mail. The last e-mail was lost (censorship?). >> Trying it again, now. >> >> >> Am 17.04.21 um 02:41 schrieb Craig Russell: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi Craig, thanks for your reply! Am 19.04.21 um 22:20 schrieb Craig Russell: > Hi Marco, > >> On Apr 18, 2021, at 8:54 PM, Marco Nguitragool wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> please don't bow to this insanity of political correctness. Language control >> / dictates are an important corner stone of every dictatorship. I >> experienced this myself in the former Soviet east. I don't want to >> experience this again and decisively object it. > Can you share some personal experience with renaming potentially offensive > terms to better welcome people to a project? I was actually talking about my experiences with the language control of the Soviets when I used to live in the GDR (the dictatorship existing in East Germany from 1949 until 1990). IMHO there is nothing offensive in any term used in software development. The problem is solely in the people who *want* to be offended. Being offended is their purpose of life. In certain ways they are (like) trolls: Listening to them and reacting to them means feeding them. Btw. concerning the term "master": I'm a Dive Master. If someone feels offended by this term, I'd rather not work with him, because he's soon going to cause more and more problems. These people never get satisfied -- not even when the core developers left and the project struggles or even fails -- then they go on and destroy the next project. Most importantly at all: These people cannot contribute anything meaningful (like good code, for example), but instead they contribute only discord hidden in beautiful language. Just take a look at Linus Torvalds. He's one of the greatest of us and even he was driven out of his project, the Linux Kernel. He returned -- but most great devs don't and the projects finally fail. Some personal experience? I have none related to a software-project, because fortunately, none of my projects was hijacked by SJWs. But I do have personal experience of exactly the same thing in the analogue world: I was a member of the Pirate Party when it was newly founded. This Party had revolutionary ideas about making democracy far more democratic by using software tools. The concept was called Liquid Democracy. The party was subverted by SJWs who drove out all the great nerds. They managed to get into control of the mailing-lists and other communication-channels and secretly censored out every communication that was about the actual goals of the party (more democracy). Of course, more and more people -- including me -- left and finally the party disappeared into the abyss of insignificance. The same happened to many software-projects -- but I was fortunately not an active member of any of these and thus cannot tell any personal experience. >> People accepting political correctness are followers of dictatorship -- >> leading to the worst chapters of history -- again. > It's not clear what dictatorship has to do with renaming a Git branch. > Perhaps you can elaborate? It's a very slippery road. As soon as you give in to the first of their demands, the next demands are following faster and faster, more and more intense. Very soon, all the great devs (who are often a bit nerdy) are driven away and only the non-productive SJWs are left. Then they leave and destroy the next project. >> Always in history, not the evil wrong-doers are the main problem, but the >> followers bowing to them and (at least silently) supporting them! > I'd say evil wrong-doers are the main problem. Do you have another experience? Yes, I do have another experience. The wrong-doers are a very very small minority. They can never get into power without the support of a large group of followers and being tolerated by the (mostly silent) majority -- until they have enough power to force their way. History is full of proofs -- just take a small subset: The witch hunt. Of course, I have no personal experience as this was a few hundred years ago. But please read about it. Estimations reach from 40'000 to 100'000 innocent people (mostly women, but also men) having been tortured and burnt alive (or otherwise killed barbarically). The 3rd Reich. Not me personally, but my family. Please read Hanna Arendt -- she's far more eloquent than me. The GDR. Here, I have far more than enough personal experience. If you made a bad joke in the presense of a wrong "friend", the Stasi came and fetched you -- interrogated you -- and if you were unlucky you went to prison for a long long time, where you often were tortured. We were enemies of the state until we were finally kicked out by the government (our freedom was most likely "purchased" by the FRG -- Western Germany). Regards, Marco :-) > Regards, > Craig >> Regards, Marco. >> >> P.S.: I'm resending this e-mail. The last e-mail was lost (censorship?). >> Trying it again, now. >> >> >> Am 17.04.21 um 02:41 schrieb Craig Russell: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi Marco, > On Apr 18, 2021, at 8:54 PM, Marco Nguitragool wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > please don't bow to this insanity of political correctness. Language control > / dictates are an important corner stone of every dictatorship. I experienced > this myself in the former Soviet east. I don't want to experience this again > and decisively object it. Can you share some personal experience with renaming potentially offensive terms to better welcome people to a project? > > People accepting political correctness are followers of dictatorship -- > leading to the worst chapters of history -- again. It's not clear what dictatorship has to do with renaming a Git branch. Perhaps you can elaborate? > > Always in history, not the evil wrong-doers are the main problem, but the > followers bowing to them and (at least silently) supporting them! I'd say evil wrong-doers are the main problem. Do you have another experience? Regards, Craig > > Regards, Marco. > > P.S.: I'm resending this e-mail. The last e-mail was lost (censorship?). > Trying it again, now. > > > Am 17.04.21 um 02:41 schrieb Craig Russell: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the >> main branch of our repos. >> >> Here is some background reading to inform our decision. >> https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin/issues/113 >> >> Let's have a discussion now and vote later. >> >> Regards, >> Craig >> >> Craig L Russell >> c...@apache.org >> > > Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename main branch?
Hi everyone, please don't bow to this insanity of political correctness. Language control / dictates are an important corner stone of every dictatorship. I experienced this myself in the former Soviet east. I don't want to experience this again and decisively object it. People accepting political correctness are followers of dictatorship -- leading to the worst chapters of history -- again. Always in history, not the evil wrong-doers are the main problem, but the followers bowing to them and (at least silently) supporting them! Regards, Marco. P.S.: I'm resending this e-mail. The last e-mail was lost (censorship?). Trying it again, now. Am 17.04.21 um 02:41 schrieb Craig Russell: > Hi, > > I'd like to have all of us come to the same understanding of renaming the > main branch of our repos. > > Here is some background reading to inform our decision. > https://github.com/pmmmwh/react-refresh-webpack-plugin/issues/113 > > Let's have a discussion now and vote later. > > Regards, > Craig > > Craig L Russell > c...@apache.org >
