Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #267682 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-02-22 11:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2024-02-23 20:40 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 78 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-22 11:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 07:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 10:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 11:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-23 11:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-23 19:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-14 19:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 01:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-03-15 09:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 17:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-03-15 17:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 17:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Will Mengarini <seldon@eskimo.com> - 2024-03-15 19:20 +0100
Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2024-03-15 20:00 +0100
Re: Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-03-15 23:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-15 21:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Arno Lehmann <al@its-lehmann.de> - 2024-02-23 12:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 13:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 13:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2024-02-25 00:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Roger Price <roger@rogerprice.org> - 2024-02-23 11:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 17:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2024-02-23 19:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Gremlin <scott-andrews@columbus.rr.com> - 2024-02-23 19:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 21:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-23 20:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 12:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP jeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 12:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-02-24 14:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2024-02-24 15:10 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-24 18:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-24 19:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 07:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 08:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP tomas@tuxteam.de - 2024-02-25 10:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 10:40 +0100
Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-25 10:50 +0100
Re: Reply to list vs. group reply [was: Inlclusive terminology...] Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> - 2024-02-25 13:20 +0100
Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 22:40 +0100
Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 01:50 +0100
Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:10 +0100
Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> - 2024-02-25 12:30 +0100
Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 13:00 +0100
Re: Postel's Law (Was Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 02:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> - 2024-03-14 18:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-24 21:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-02-25 00:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-25 00:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-25 12:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 15:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP fxkl47BF@protonmail.com - 2024-02-23 16:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 21:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:50 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-23 22:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 03:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 04:00 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@gmail.com> - 2024-02-24 23:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-24 23:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> - 2024-02-23 18:20 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> - 2024-02-23 21:30 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2024-02-23 22:40 +0100
Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-23 20:40 +0100
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | Ralph Aichinger <ra@h5.or.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-22 11:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IaeEF-bPT3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hello! I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, i.e. how far this has been progressed in Debian. Is there anything planned to get "master/slave" terminology out of network bonding/LACP in Debian (or Linux kernel or whoever decides this terminology)? I know these things are slow to change, just wondering. https://wiki.debian.org/Bonding /ralph
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 07:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IawUW-c1c3-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267682 |
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:19:16AM +0100, Ralph Aichinger wrote:
> I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the
> political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, i.e.
> how far this has been progressed in Debian.
As Debian is not itself upstream for most of the software it
distributes, it is going to rely on upstream projects to make these
changes. I am not aware of any coordinated effort in Debian to find
instances of this terminology and propose changes upstream.
That sort of project-wide consensus is hard to achieve in Debian
(even on non-controversial topics) so I wouldn't be surprised if
Debian Developers who are interested in this would not get further
by just proposing the changes to upstream projects themselves as
individuals.
So then, if you spot such terminology in use somewhere there is
nothing stopping you from having a look at their issue tracker to
see if there is already an issue in place about that and possibly
propose changes yourself.
> Is there anything planned to get "master/slave" terminology out of
> network bonding/LACP in Debian (or Linux kernel or whoever decides
> this terminology)?
The Ethernet bonding driver is a kernel module. It is quite old
(decades) and hasn't seen much development recently, I think because
it is generally considered complete.
There has been a replacement/successor for the Ethernet bonding
driver for some time — the teaming driver — which does away with the
older terminology as well as providing a few other improvements:
https://libteam.org/
However I must confess that despite having bonded Ethernets on all
my works servers (with ifenslave for userland control) I personally
have never spent the time to convert to libteam and I rarely see
other examples of people having done so.
I think possibly a reason for this is that the Ethernet bonding
driver was considered complete a long time ago and the purely
technical improvements of the teaming driver are quite small or
niche, so few people see the need to change. I have used the bonding
driver since before the teaming driver existed, so there's been some
inertia against me learning a new thing.
It would be good to see more use and examples for libteam to help
people like me¹ feel more confident in switching.
If you proceed with it, how about making a page on the Debian
wiki?
Thanks,
Andy
¹ Although in my specific case we are actually in the middle of
switching to a BGP architecture where each server BGP peers and
all traffic is routed at layer 3, not switched at layer 2. Each
server's individual Ethernet interfaces are being broken out and
bonding will not be used at all any more. The redundancy of
network will come from BGP.
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 10:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAlQ-c33W-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267682 |
On 22.02.2024 11:19, Ralph Aichinger wrote: > Hello! > > I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the > political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, i.e. > how far this has been progressed in Debian. There is no good reason *why*. It's entirely US political feel-good activism that doesn't change anything but wastes people's time. Do you actually think pressing on brake pedal oppresses anybody ? Because it also has master and slave cylinder. All it does is wastes tens of thousands of people's time once the have to fix every script, tool and doc piece related to it, for absolutely no benefit aside from making some twitter activist happy "they did something". It would *literally* break every single script that checks the status of bonding config in system, as it is all just plain text. -- Mariusz Gronczewski (XANi) <xani@devrandom.pl> GnuPG: 0xEA8ACE64 https://devrandom.eu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 11:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAvv-c373-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267701 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:33:08AM +0100, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote: > On 22.02.2024 11:19, Ralph Aichinger wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the > > political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, i.e. > > how far this has been progressed in Debian. > > There is no good reason *why*. It's entirely US political feel-good activism [...] Oh, goody. A culture warrior. *plonk* -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAFb-c3pB-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267702 |
Am 23.02.2024 schrieb <tomas@tuxteam.de>: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:33:08AM +0100, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote: > > On 22.02.2024 11:19, Ralph Aichinger wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the > > > political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, > > > i.e. how far this has been progressed in Debian. > > > > There is no good reason *why*. It's entirely US political feel-good > > activism > [...] > > Oh, goody. A culture warrior. I'm sure you have good reasons for changing the terms. Feel free to provide some real arguments that have a benefit for the users.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tomas@tuxteam.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 11:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAOR-c3sL-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267703 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 11:00:39AM +0100, Marco Moock wrote: > Am 23.02.2024 schrieb <tomas@tuxteam.de>: [...] > > Oh, goody. A culture warrior. > > I'm sure you have good reasons for changing the terms. Feel free to > provide some real arguments that have a benefit for the users. I'm not the one proposing changing the terms. But I do have strong reasons to dislike people foaming at the mouth whenever someone considers even discussing it. Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 12:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaBKV-c41l-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267702 |
Dnia 2024-02-23, o godz. 10:54:09 <tomas@tuxteam.de> napisał(a): > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:33:08AM +0100, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote: > > On 22.02.2024 11:19, Ralph Aichinger wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the > > > political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, > > > i.e. how far this has been progressed in Debian. > > > > There is no good reason *why*. It's entirely US political feel-good > > activism > [...] > > Oh, goody. A culture warrior. > > *plonk* > Me? Exactly opposite, I'm against bringing culture into tech, it's the OP that decided to. It's a pair of words that worked well for decades for the purpose. Now someone decided to do some feel good activism and just add work for no gain. I'm against that. -- Mariusz Gronczewski (XANi) <xani666@gmail.com> GnuPG: 0xEA8ACE64 https://devrandom.eu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 11:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAFb-c3pB-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267701 |
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:33:08AM +0100, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote: > On 22.02.2024 11:19, Ralph Aichinger wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I know this is a loaded topic. I really don't want to discuss the > > political aspects of the "why", but just want to know the facts, i.e. > > how far this has been progressed in Debian. > > There is no good reason *why*. It's entirely US political feel-good activism > that doesn't change anything but wastes people's time. Do you actually think > pressing on brake pedal oppresses anybody ? Because it also has master and slave > cylinder. > > All it does is wastes tens of thousands of people's time once the have to fix > every script, tool and doc piece related to it, for absolutely no benefit > aside from making some twitter activist happy "they did something". > It would *literally* break every single script that checks the status > of bonding config in system, as it is all just plain text. +1 It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should we scour our systems looking for similar issues in other languages ? Then in, say, 20 years time when different words will then be considered offensive, by some, do this all again ? -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 https://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers. Registration Information: https://www.phcomp.co.uk/Contact.html #include <std_disclaimer.h>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 11:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaAYx-c3w0-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267704 |
Am 23.02.2024 schrieb Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk>: > It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should we scour > our systems looking for similar issues in other languages ? Then in, > say, 20 years time when different words will then be considered > offensive, by some, do this all again ? In Germany, some organizations do that as well - and most people are annoyed by that because it has no benefit. The most important thing is that the upstream projects would need to change that - including all the translators. This is always a PITA - for no realistic benefit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-23 19:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IaIt3-c865-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267708 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 11:24:39AM +0100, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 23.02.2024 schrieb Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk>:
>
> > It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should we scour
> > our systems looking for similar issues in other languages ?
[...]
Fifty years ago it was "normal" to beat kids with a ruler
(I know from experience). Should we stop doing this now?
I'd say yes, but perhaps that's just me.
> > say, 20 years time when different words will then be considered
> > offensive, by some, do this all again ?
>
> In Germany, some organizations do that as well - and most people are
> annoyed by that because it has no benefit.
While I do agree that reality is complex, and that it not always makes
sense, dismissing it right away because it doesn't matter to *you*
is also wrong.
> The most important thing is that the upstream projects would need to
> change that - including all the translators.
>
> This is always a PITA - for no realistic benefit.
No benefit to *you* perhaps. See, I'm watching this space (free
software and friends) for quite a while now. I've watched it
since before the birth of Linux. Since then, the diversity of
people involved has increased quite a bit (it could be better,
mind you). So the array of things which matter has widened.
It isn't unplausible that the terminology "slave" is offensive
to someone outside your (or my) bubble. So it does make sense
to listen to others than just going by one's "gut feeling".
Here's [1] one ref on that. So yes, it might matter to some.
And to all those "I only take technical decisions". Folks:
tech is as much about physics and chemistry as it is about
anatomy and social science; after all, it is made by humans
for humans. And as to what happens when you have a strong
selection bias in technical design, [2] seems to be the
standard ref those days.
I just don't get it. If people isn't interested in the topic,
fine. Debian is huge, and no one can be interested in every
topic. Just keep out. But this kind of strong reactions...
- "there is no good reason *why*"
- "US political feel-good activism" [3]
- "wastes people's time"
... as seen in this thread, to a simple question? Nah.
And now, I'm out of that thread myself (oh, another package:
git's default branch name "master" has become "main" these
days. No kittens were sacrified for that).
Cheers
[1] https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psn/2022/09/inclusive-language
[2] Carolina Criado Pérez "Invisible Women"
Exposing data bias in a world designed for men
Penguin Random House, 2019
[3] The OP was asking from Austria, and given their name, is
Austrian, but hey, there you go. Perhaps there was some
contagion via Schwarzenegger -- I hear he is (*horrors*)
in California.
--
tomás
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-14 19:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IhY02-gHn3-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #267704 |
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 2:07 AM Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> wrote: > It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should we scour our > systems looking for similar issues in other languages ? Then in, say, 20 years > time when different words will then be considered offensive, by some, do this > all again ? Yes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 01:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <Ii3VL-gKRA-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268266 |
Mike Castle wrote: >> It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. >> Should we scour our systems looking for similar issues in >> other languages? Then in, say, 20 years time when different >> words will then be considered offensive, by some, do this >> all again? > > Yes. Remember, there are A LOT of words and expressions we don't use anymore, and that's good, as they are offensive and disrespectful. But once they were perfectly normal. Still, one by one, they have disappeared from active use. What's to say we are right now, just because _we_ happen to live right now, suddenly done with that process? If it had to be done in the past, why not right now - and in the future as well? Now how to actually do it is another thing. Maybe one should just focus on a few words and expressions that are clearly offensive, and remove them from schools, universities, public service TV, all official state-related communication, etc. With no intention of ever creating a 100% offensive-free language, removing the worst offenders from the scene often is enough. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 09:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <Iibqh-gPFT-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268279 |
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 01:42:25AM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote: > Mike Castle wrote: > > >> It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. > >> Should we scour our systems looking for similar issues in > >> other languages? Then in, say, 20 years time when different > >> words will then be considered offensive, by some, do this > >> all again? > > > > Yes. > > Remember, there are A LOT of words and expressions we don't > use anymore, and that's good, as they are offensive and > disrespectful. But once they were perfectly normal. Still, one > by one, they have disappeared from active use. That is the big difference. Not use words *currently* deemed offensive in *new* publications (books, newspaper articles, ...) - this is not hard to do. What we are faced with is something very different: a call to locate and modify use in programs that might have been written a long time ago. The effort needed to do this is large and will doubtless cause failures in systems that have been working well for years. It is not just a matter of modifying Debian (+ RedHat + ...) sources but the sources on private systems. We seem to be told that this must be done by those who will not be doing the work. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 https://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers. Registration Information: https://www.phcomp.co.uk/Contact.html #include <std_disclaimer.h>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Castle <dalgoda+debian@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 17:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <Iiii5-gTWg-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268288 |
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 1:49 AM Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> wrote: > We seem to be told that this must be done by those who will not be doing the > work. Was that explicitly stated anywhere? Or is the lack of any type of explicit "I'm willing to help drive this" statements leading to that conclusion? mrc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 17:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IiirM-gTZl-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268294 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 09:01:30AM -0700, Mike Castle wrote: > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 1:49 AM Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> wrote: > > We seem to be told that this must be done by those who will not be doing the > > work. > > Was that explicitly stated anywhere? Or is the lack of any type of > explicit "I'm willing to help drive this" statements leading to that > conclusion? My humble take: just a troll in search of food. Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 17:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IiiL7-gU5z-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268294 |
Mike Castle wrote: > Was that explicitly stated anywhere? Or is the lack of any > type of explicit "I'm willing to help drive this" statements > leading to that conclusion? Relax, everyone does something somewhere. But it would be a boring world if they were only allowed to talk about that. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 17:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IiiBr-gU2z-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268288 |
Alain D D Williams wrote: > That is the big difference. Not use words *currently* deemed > offensive in *new* publications (books, newspaper articles, > ...) - this is not hard to do. Indeed, and that is what you should focus on. The past is the past anyway. > What we are faced with is something very different: a call > to locate and modify use in programs that might have been > written a long time ago. The effort needed to do this is > large and will doubtless cause failures in systems that have > been working well for years. I must admit the whole concept of source code being offensive is a bit bizarre to me. For anyone to really change that it in a way that makes sense it must be a really offensive word and a general understanding that people reading and writing the code really reacts negatively to it. Because in my experience, people who do this kind of politics aren't typically programmers, even. But I may be wrong and from a technical perspective, it is possible to change source, obviously. > It is not just a matter of modifying Debian (+ RedHat + ...) > sources but the sources on private systems. I think it is a bad idea to go for a clean sweep. That either don't work or end up like the Khmer Rouge. It is enough to remove the most offensive words and expressions, whatever they are, from the most public platforms. > We seem to be told that this must be done by those who will > not be doing the work. Ah, it is okay for people to have opinions and voice them without doing stuff. But sometimes such people somehow get into positions of authority and, worst case scenario, force people who have been doing stuff for ages out of their projects. That's horrible but such instances should not be blamed on the general "opinions but no work" personality, who is actually quite harmless. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Will Mengarini <seldon@eskimo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 19:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <IikjT-gV5P-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268279 |
* Mariusz Gronczewski <xani@devrandom.pl> [24-02/23=Fr 10:33 +0100]: >>> It's entirely US political feel-good activism that >>> doesn't change anything but wastes people's time. Do >>> you actually think pressing on brake pedal oppresses >>> anybody? Because it also has master and slave cylinders. >>> >>> All it does is wastes tens of thousands of people's time >>> once they have to fix every script, tool and doc piece >>> related to it, for absolutely no benefit aside from making >>> some Twitter activist happy "they did something". It would >>> *literally* break every single script that [...] * Alain D D Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk> [24-02/23=Fr 10:07 +0000]: >> It is "fixing" an issue for today's English speakers. Should >> we scour our systems looking for similar issues in other >> languages? Then in, say, 20 years time when different words >> will then be considered offensive, by some, do this all again? * Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [24-03/15=Fr 01:42 +0100]: > Remember, there are A LOT of words and expressions > we don't use anymore, and that's good, as > they are offensive and disrespectful. [...] > > [...] > > Maybe one should just focus on a few words and expressions that > are clearly offensive, and remove them from schools, universities, > public service TV, all official state-related communication, etc. > > With no intention of ever creating a 100% offensive-free language, > removing the worst offenders from the scene often is enough. Words I find offensive include "authority" and "manager", so checking `apropos authori manager` I see we have a lot of important work to do. We also need to do something about book titles like "Mastering $Foo". Seriously, you humans have only another five billion Earth years until your sun engulfs your home planet, and you're spending time on *THIS*?!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 20:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IikWC-gViZ-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268303 |
On 16/3/24 02:27, Van Snyder wrote: > On Fri, 2024-03-15 at 11:09 -0700, Will Mengarini wrote: >> Seriously, you humans have only another five billion Earth years until >> your sun engulfs your home planet, and you're spending time on *THIS*?! > > At the rate that sea plants and creatures are removing CO2 from the > atmosphere to combine it with calcium to make bones and armor, > eventually eternal limestone, we have only about eighteen million years > until Gaia commits suicide. Why should we continue to be complicit? > > Read Patrick Moore. The Positive Impact of Human CO2 Emissions on the > Survival of Life on Earth. Frontier Science for Public Policy, June 2016. > -- .... Bret Busby Armadale Western Australia (UTC+0800) .................
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-03-15 23:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Please terminate this faecal matter - the whole thread appears to be a troll.....Re: Inclusive terminology (instead of master/slave) for network bonding/LACP |
| Message-ID | <IiodQ-gXnb-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #268304 |
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 2:59 PM Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> wrote: > > On 16/3/24 02:27, Van Snyder wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-03-15 at 11:09 -0700, Will Mengarini wrote: > >> Seriously, you humans have only another five billion Earth years until > >> your sun engulfs your home planet, and you're spending time on *THIS*?! > > > > At the rate that sea plants and creatures are removing CO2 from the > > atmosphere to combine it with calcium to make bones and armor, > > eventually eternal limestone, we have only about eighteen million years > > until Gaia commits suicide. Why should we continue to be complicit? > > > > Read Patrick Moore. The Positive Impact of Human CO2 Emissions on the > > Survival of Life on Earth. Frontier Science for Public Policy, June 2016. ++. That whole thread was fecal matter. Best to let it die... Jeff
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web