Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Philipp Kern]

On 2020-02-13 09:14, Timo Weingärtner wrote:

Hallo Ulrike,

12.02.20 17:46 Ulrike Uhlig:

On 12.02.20 17:01, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> In any case, since DSA had to restart everything at UBC, the piuparts
> slave got restarted as well and it's churning through the backlog.
> Unfortunately it looks like restarting the slave just eats its logs.

I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1

Quoting from there: "Master-slave is an oppressive metaphor that will
and should never become fully detached from history."

As an alternative:
"Several options are suggested here and should be chosen based on the
pairing that is most clear in context:

Primary-secondary
Leader-follower
Active-standby
Primary-replica
Writer-reader
Coordinator-worker
Parent-helper
"


I don't think giving slaves new labels helps them in any way; they will 
still

be slaves.

Or do you intend to actually liberate them?
If yes: how? which liberties are they supposed to gain?
If no: then you're actually helping the slave owners hiding their 
wrongdoings.


Regardless if you buy the premise of racism in language, the 
alternatives suggested are actually quite instructive: You can use names 
that are actually more descriptive and do not invoke bad memories, i.e. 
it's a constructive proposal. The same is true for blacklist vs. 
whitelist as mentioned in there, for which allowlist and rejectlist are 
terms that actually describe what is happening in most contexts.


Of course communities also build up some slang to see who is "in" the 
group and who is "out". But it actually makes things more accessible to 
others if you describe things as they are.


Kind regards
Philipp Kern

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Birger Schacht]

Thanks to Ulrike also from me for pointing that out, its an important
topic! I think its good to see more and more software projects realizing
that terminology matters and that the words we use have an impact in
shaping societies.

(Thanks also to nicoo for this useful tip I stumbled upon some months ago:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42871542/how-to-create-a-git-repository-with-the-default-branch-name-other-than-master/50880622#50880622)

On 2/13/20 12:18 PM, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> 
> Mallory Knodel is one of the chairs of the Human Rights Protocol 
> Considerations
> (hrpc) research group[3], and I hope there will be more to come from that 
> group
> in the future. The draft on "Notes on networking standards and politics"[4] 
> looks
> interesting, for instance.

Yes, the HRPC list is definitly worth following, some other interesting
documents might by:

Feminism and protocols:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-guerra-feminism-01

Research into Human Rights Protocol Considerations:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8280

Anonymity, Human Rights and Internet Protocols:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00

Guidelines for Human Rights Protocol Considerations:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines-03

Cheers,
Birger


> 
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/rg/hrpc/about/
> [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hrpc-political/
> 
> Cheers,
> 





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Nicolas Dandrimont]

* Miriam Ruiz  [2020-02-13 11:49:25 +0100]:

> El mié., 12 feb. 2020 a las 21:07, Nicolas Dandrimont
> () escribió:
> >
> > * Ulrike Uhlig  [2020-02-12 17:46:15 +0100]:
> > > I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
> > >
> > > https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1
> >
> > Thanks for the pointer to this document; I hope the authors succeed in 
> > putting
> > it through the RFC process.
> 
> I'm sorry I'm not familiar with the bureaucratic procedures of the
> IETF and the RFC process, but I couldn't avoid to see that the text
> says "This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2019".
> 
> Does that mean that it was rejected, or is it just a reference
> timestamp with no direct relevance in the process?

Hey!

As far as I can tell, all drafts have an expiry date, which can be postponed if
the authors are still actively working on it.

According to the IETF data tracker on this draft[1], the draft was updated once
in March 2019, and then the new document's expiry date passed in september.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-knodel-terminology/

From looking at the IETF mail archives[2] I don't see much discussion, if any,
of the draft.

[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=%22draft-knodel-terminology%22

Mallory Knodel is one of the chairs of the Human Rights Protocol Considerations
(hrpc) research group[3], and I hope there will be more to come from that group
in the future. The draft on "Notes on networking standards and politics"[4] 
looks
interesting, for instance.

[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/rg/hrpc/about/
[4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hrpc-political/

Cheers,
-- 
Nicolas Dandrimont



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Ondřej Surý]

There’s no such thing as rejected in IETF. The timestamp is artificially set to 
6 months from the I-D published date. Expired draft could mean many things:

- there was not enough consensus to proceed
- draft editors lost interest 
- draft editors didn’t have time to update the draft in time
- or perhaps the document was not suited to be published by IETF

The only thing I can say is that the document was not adopted by any working 
group and that it expired due lack of updates.

Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý 

> On 13 Feb 2020, at 11:50, Miriam Ruiz  wrote:
> 
> El mié., 12 feb. 2020 a las 21:07, Nicolas Dandrimont
> () escribió:
>> 
>> * Ulrike Uhlig  [2020-02-12 17:46:15 +0100]:
>>> I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
>>> 
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1
>> 
>> Thanks for the pointer to this document; I hope the authors succeed in 
>> putting
>> it through the RFC process.
> 
> I'm sorry I'm not familiar with the bureaucratic procedures of the
> IETF and the RFC process, but I couldn't avoid to see that the text
> says "This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2019".
> 
> Does that mean that it was rejected, or is it just a reference
> timestamp with no direct relevance in the process?
> 
> Greetings and thanks,
> Miry
> 

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Oskar Berggren]

Den tors 13 feb. 2020 kl 10:49 skrev Miriam Ruiz :

> El mié., 12 feb. 2020 a las 21:07, Nicolas Dandrimont
> () escribió:
> >
> > * Ulrike Uhlig  [2020-02-12 17:46:15 +0100]:
> > > I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
> > >
> > >
> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1
> >
> > Thanks for the pointer to this document; I hope the authors succeed in
> putting
> > it through the RFC process.
>
> I'm sorry I'm not familiar with the bureaucratic procedures of the
> IETF and the RFC process, but I couldn't avoid to see that the text
> says "This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2019".
>
> Does that mean that it was rejected, or is it just a reference
> timestamp with no direct relevance in the process?
>


I can't comment of the procedures of the date stamp, but certainly the
general message of the text is still valid.

/Oskar

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Miriam Ruiz]

El mié., 12 feb. 2020 a las 21:07, Nicolas Dandrimont
() escribió:
>
> * Ulrike Uhlig  [2020-02-12 17:46:15 +0100]:
> > I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
> >
> > https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1
>
> Thanks for the pointer to this document; I hope the authors succeed in putting
> it through the RFC process.

I'm sorry I'm not familiar with the bureaucratic procedures of the
IETF and the RFC process, but I couldn't avoid to see that the text
says "This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2019".

Does that mean that it was rejected, or is it just a reference
timestamp with no direct relevance in the process?

Greetings and thanks,
Miry

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Dominik George]

>PS: I really used real scissors and real glue to cut and paste text, so 
>I'm having less problems with metaphors, but I think most metaphors are 
>just wrong (I need to learn what they do, and then maybe I learn later 
>what it was the origin). We are supposed to make computer easy, but we 
>use odd concepts. [You may see in Quora or on other fora how young 
>people are confused on our metaphors].

…and people who find themselves cool keep inventing new metaphors. I see (and 
fight) this almost daily at my oh-so-agile workplace.

My pet peeve, which I got successfully banned recently, was "post mortem", a 
meeting in an incident response cycle. The shit hit the fan when we held a 
"post mortem" about a mistake by a collegue that caused data loss, on the day 
of this very colleague's *actual funeral*, and *noone even noticed what we were 
doing*.

In short: It is not only terms invented by people that are now old and grey, 
but also new terms by people who want to play cool.

Stop that - give things names that just tell what they literally are, and 
that's it!

-nik (now going to fight "grooming" meetings in his "cyber" company)

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 13/02/2020 21:14, Timo Weingärtner wrote:

I don't think giving slaves new labels helps them in any way; they will still
be slaves.


True, but once "freed", they could compete to be Employee of the Month.

Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Giacomo Catenazzi]

On 13.02.2020 09:14, Timo Weingärtner wrote:

Hallo Ulrike,


Quoting from there: "Master-slave is an oppressive metaphor that will
and should never become fully detached from history."



I don't think giving slaves new labels helps them in any way; they will still
be slaves.


You missed the point. The intent it is not to give a new label to remove 
the negative term.  The intent it is to maintain the negative 
connotation to "slave"


We are just abusing the word "slave", so making it "normal". The intent 
is to avoid this normalization or the term.


Now we have people which learn "slave" from computer world, before than 
from history, so it could seems it is just who give and who receive 
orders. [in our context the "slave" has still full powers].



PS: I really used real scissors and real glue to cut and paste text, so 
I'm having less problems with metaphors, but I think most metaphors are 
just wrong (I need to learn what they do, and then maybe I learn later 
what it was the origin). We are supposed to make computer easy, but we 
use odd concepts. [You may see in Quora or on other fora how young 
people are confused on our metaphors].



ciao
cate

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Timo Weingärtner]

Hallo Ulrike,

12.02.20 17:46 Ulrike Uhlig:
> On 12.02.20 17:01, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> > In any case, since DSA had to restart everything at UBC, the piuparts
> > slave got restarted as well and it's churning through the backlog.
> > Unfortunately it looks like restarting the slave just eats its logs.
> 
> I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1
> 
> Quoting from there: "Master-slave is an oppressive metaphor that will
> and should never become fully detached from history."
> 
> As an alternative:
> "Several options are suggested here and should be chosen based on the
> pairing that is most clear in context:
> 
> Primary-secondary
> Leader-follower
> Active-standby
> Primary-replica
> Writer-reader
> Coordinator-worker
> Parent-helper
> "

I don't think giving slaves new labels helps them in any way; they will still 
be slaves.

Or do you intend to actually liberate them?
If yes: how? which liberties are they supposed to gain?
If no: then you're actually helping the slave owners hiding their wrongdoings.


Grüße
Timo

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Master-Slave terminology Re: [Piuparts-devel] piuparts.d.o stalled?

[Nicolas Dandrimont]

Hi Ulrike!

* Ulrike Uhlig  [2020-02-12 17:46:15 +0100]:

> On 12.02.20 17:01, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> 
> > In any case, since DSA had to restart everything at UBC, the piuparts slave 
> > got
> > restarted as well and it's churning through the backlog. Unfortunately it 
> > looks
> > like restarting the slave just eats its logs.
> 
> I'd like to attract your attention to this very fine document:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html#rfc.section.1.1

Thanks for the pointer to this document; I hope the authors succeed in putting
it through the RFC process.

I know full well the issues with this terminology. Piuparts is a system I
inherited only a few weeks ago, and the master/slave terminology is deeply
ingrained throughout its code and documentation (as well as its deployment).
It's going to take a while as well as substantial effort to switch away to
something else. But I sure intend to get to it at some point.

Before people expend too much energy defending the legacy terminology (/me
glares at #debian-devel), might I suggest directing that energy towards
reporting some bugs discovered by piuparts (or fixing some piuparts bugs)
instead?

Thanks,
-- 
Nicolas Dandrimont



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature