I'd be in favor of changing blacklist/whitelist into something that makes sense. In many cases, that's going to be context dependent, but often blocklist/allowlist will work.
With regards to "master" as the development branch on GitHub, I'd like to pick whatever GitHub eventually goes with as a "new default". Cheers, Markus On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, at 9:56 PM, Daniele Procida wrote: > Tom Carrick wrote: > > >I don't think there is an easy answer here, and I open this can of worms > >somewhat reluctantly. I do think Luke is correct that we should be > >concerned with our credibility if we wrongly change this, but I'm also > >worried about our credibility if we don't. > > There are plenty of black-something terms in English that are both > negative and have nothing whatsoever to do with race. The black and the > dark are those things that are hidden and sinister, as contrasted with > those that are in the light and open to scrutiny (black magic, dark > arts, black legs, blackguards, blackmail, etc). > > I think it would look pretty silly to confuse meanings that refer to > what's shadowy and obscure with things that have racial overtones, and > I think we should steer well clear of that. It's not at all like > metaphors such as master/slave. > > If we made such a change and tried to justify it on the grounds of a > connection between race and the word "black" in those terms, we'd be > rightly laughed at. > > 1000 neckbeards would immediately come out of the woodwork having done > some basic web searches going 'neeer neeer neeer, the Django Software > Foundation overflowing with snowflakes who think that "blacklist" means > [etc etc etc]', and who has the stomach for that? > > Even choosing to do it on the basis of the potential for offence seems > to be a fairly flimsy argument. > > On the other hand, we can do whatever the hell we like. > > We don't have to justify anything to anyone. If we want to change words > in *our* framework, it's absolutely nobody's business but our own. > > If black members of the DSF or the community are disheartened that the > word "black" gets to refer to so many negative things and are bothered > when they see them in Django, then that alone is sufficient > justification. > > If we want a reason for changing "blacklist" (or whatever), it's that > people in our community said they would feel better about it and asked > to have it changed. > > Acknowledging how someone feels about something and acting because you > care about their feelings seems to be a respectful thing to do. > > "We did it because we felt like it" is an utterly unanswerable justification. > > The DSF has credibility because the software is first rate, the > foundation is well-governed and the community is an international > example of decency and kindness. Things like this become credible > because the DSF chooses to do them - it's not the other way round. > > Daniele > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20200615195628.938692561%40mail.gandi.net. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/64e1b503-289c-4119-acfc-51fe6537addb%40www.fastmail.com.
