Re: That's enough.

Hi Cal, I'd like to reiterate what Jacob has said - some change in communities is inevitable, but we'd aspire to those changes being positive for the most part. I'm saddened that your experience of those changes in the Django community hasn't been positive. I'd also like to make the same offer

Re: That's enough.

I'm sorry you feel that way, Cal; your contributions have been appreciated, and I've personally appreciated having you around. Thanks for all you've done. If you ever feel up to sharing with me more specifics, so perhaps we can try to change things to be more welcoming to contributions, well, you

Re: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

On 05/27/2014 10:20 PM, Michael Manfre wrote: > It was very clearly stated in the other email thread about this, by > the no longer offensively titled BDFL :P, that the rename will not be > reverted. It's nearly impossible to get a change in to core when there > is a single core dev opposed to it

Re: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

It was very clearly stated in the other email thread about this, by the no longer offensively titled BDFL :P, that the rename will not be reverted. It's nearly impossible to get a change in to core when there is a single core dev opposed to it and there have been many core devs who are -1 on

Re: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

On Tue, 27 May 2014 05:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Kai wrote: > What is so bad about removing terms like master/slave that are > related to or even originate from so much suffering and injustice and > replacing it with neutral terms? Primary/Replica is used in many DB > systems too.

feature request - use logging in WSGIRequestHandler

Hi sometimes when you are developing you get so much output in the console, especially when you have many medias on the page. It would be nice to use the logging system to remove those messages, but right now stderr is being used. Using the logging system for choosing whether we want to see

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

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

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

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

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

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

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

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

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

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

Re: "Master/slave terminology"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

> > 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 :)

Re: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

What is so bad about removing terms like master/slave that are related to or even originate from so much suffering and injustice and replacing it with neutral terms? Primary/Replica is used in many DB systems too. On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 2:14:43 PM UTC+2, Meira wrote: > > As some of you may

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

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

Re: Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

It took 7 minutes and 23 seconds to merge this troll PR without any discussion and now Meira is suggested to wait 6 months? But what can happen? вторник, 27 мая 2014 г., 16:14:43 UTC+4 пользователь Meira написал: > > As some of you may have notice, a hot discussion is happening in the >

Master/slave trolling pull request accepted to django master branch

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 Essentially, this pull request suggests that all occurences of master/slave be replaced with leader/follower. While this is clearly insane, a less