On Tue, 27 May 2014 05:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Kai <schnei...@gmail.com> 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. Bad thing is that the whole logic of removing or changing every single word that in theory might sound unpleasant to somebody is fundamentally flawed, for a number of reasons: First, to be consistent you should first find at least one person who really feels personally offended by the term - but, from what I see, nobody even tried; the assumption that in theory there might be somebody somewhere is enough. Second, there is no end to it - for nearly every word you can find someone who dislikes it for one reason or another, whereas you have to name things somehow or we would be unable to communicate. And third, by going that way you are ignoring a quite large group of people who care about their language, and their history too, and really feed bad seing both of them tweaked and mangled. Those people deserve some respect, too. Personally, I feel very strongly about it, and fully understand and support Meira et al. B. > > On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 2:14:43 PM UTC+2, 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 Essentially, this pull > > request suggests that all occurences of master/slave be replaced > > with leader/follower. While this is clearly insane, a less > > jaw-dropping, but still weird change was made in commit > > https://github.com/django/django/commit/beec05686ccc3bee8461f9a5a02c607a02352ae1 > > > > Many users in comments to the original pull request agreed that > > primary/replica is not a good word choice, is vague and misleading. > > Current django docs compensate for the confusion by referring to > > "master/slave" in parentheses after mentioning "primary/replica". > > Of course, this change is nothing more than cosmetical, but it > > still carries more downsides than upsides. > > Master/slave is* immediately obvious* for the experienced users, > > and *easily googleable* for the newbies. > > > > I reverted the change and sent a pull request > > https://github.com/django/django/pull/2720. In the corresponding > > ticket, I was told to "wait 6 months" and then resubmit the ticket. > > ( https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/22707), and the pull > > request was closed immediately with an advice to start a discussion > > on mailing list. So that's what I'm doing here :) > > > > I sum up my personal point of view in this comment: > > https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692#issuecomment-44265422 > > > > Of course, it'll be hard for the django maintainers to admit their > > mistake and revert the change. It's always hard to admit mistakes, > > but it's better than leaving it how it is. > > > -- I don't want to belong to any club that accepts people like me as members. (Groucho Marx) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20140527215632.1c093394%40fiodor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
