You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com> on 2021/05/01 20:16:04 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Renaming default git branch name from 'master' to 'main'
and replace offensive words as appropriate for inclusiveness
I see a lot of arguments here that I would have liked to see on the
discussion thread. Let's go back to that. BTW I disagree with most of them
but they do need addressing in a discussion and keeping the voting thread
open does not make sense.
I don't care about political correctness one bit, but I do care about
inclusivity if it aims to not scare away potential good developers.
<politics mode=incorrect>
I really think all those arguments against are excrements of male cattle.
</politics>
Please, all bring your arguments to the discussion thread,
https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf .
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:28 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
> (even though I'm a PMC member - I believe I have the right to cast a
> non-binding vote? Otherwise I would change it to 0)
>
>
> Explanation:
>
> While I do know where this comes from, and while my following comment has
> NOTHING to do with the person who raised it (my own colleague who I
> appreciate very much), I have to state my "no -opinion" for this vote/topic
> in general:
>
>
> 1. What is offensive with the word "master" - shall we ask it's removed
> from the dictionary as well?, shall we ask words like "slave", "black",
> "white" and other extremes to be removed? Shall we remove words male /
> female (or even HE/SHE let it just be IT) so that everyone is unisex and
> shall we change...let's change the whole world...
>
> 2. This whole movement (in wild) is the absolute political bullshit
> (apologies for sharp tongue), utter nonsense which will make nobody's life
> better, or make "slaved" people more free, or will allow people in many
> countries to have a free walk (during this "pandemic" times), etc, etc.
> Real-life (outside of computer) freedoms are DRASTICALLY cut down, against
> all laws and constitution in many countries, but we are changing branch
> names, renaming "master" to "main" (for the record, I might find the word
> "main" offending to me, so I might raise another vote for something even
> more neutral...) and making some changes which change nothing for anyone.
>
> Removing "master" and "slave" will not erase the history, which was... what
> it was...ugly and full of blood and misery for some. And history, should
> not be forgotten - because we learn from it about bad things in order for
> them to NOT happen again.
>
> //political uncoretness off
> //rant off
> peace to the world
>
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 17:53, Nathan McGarvey <na...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1, -1, and +0:
> >
> > Overall idea: +1 (Agree with Rene regarding context being important,
> > too.)
> >
> >
> > Some specific pull requests: -1 or 0:
> >
> > -1: How is this related? It seems to be a commit that shouldn't
> > have been a part of this pull request since it is a brand new file that
> > is unrelated:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9545ce619b377326daae5b303ffe89b5ea90a288
> >
> >
> > +0 or -1: I can't reasonably review this:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9ce732ceeb47bf6dee73073d892a51fbeea39f09
> > as it changed over 5000 files going back many many years in the past to
> > now-dead/unmaintained code. This is a huge repo-bloat commit of doom.
> > (You're changing API docs for dead code on something that can't even be
> > manually reviewed). I'd suggest just adding an explanatory file for
> > unsupported releases instead of changing thousands of files that are a
> > decade old. Maybe even removing old API docs would be an option. Or just
> > change the latest X releases, and gracefully age off the old ones.
> > (Related: How much bigger does this make the git repo and how much
> > longer does it take to apply diffs when cloning?)
> >
> >
> > Other questions/comments:
> >
> > Is there a overarching ASF criteria for what words are
> > inappropriate for future development?
> >
> > Should there be git hooks similar to scan for such terms?
> >
> > How about when upstream projects use a inappropriate term? E.g.
> > MySQL pre-8.0.23 uses "master" in their configs, variables, and
> > documents, but uses "replication source" or "replica", etc. after that
> > point in time. (Ref:
> >
> >
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/binlog-replication-configuration-overview.html
> > )
> > Having a disjuncture between the implementation code and the upstream
> > project makes it really hard to cross-reference documentation. The
> > client/conf/db.properties.in file was changed to be db.cloud.backup, but
> > why not make that db.cloud.replica or something that lines up with their
> > documentation? Another example is with network interfaces. The "slave"
> > term is different than the proposed "secondary" in Linux. A secondary
> > interface actually means an alias or a fully separate physical device.
> > Maybe "member device" or something is more correct.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Nathan McGarvey
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/30/21 6:43 AM, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Following the discussion thread on renaming default git branch name and
> > inclusiveness [1], I would like to start a vote to gather consensus on
> the
> > following plan:
> > >
> > > 1. Accept the following rename PRs (raised against 'master' branch)
> > which renames git default branch to 'main' and replaces some offensive
> > words, and Merge them post acceptance.
> > > - cloudstack => PR:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4922
> > > - cloudstack-documentation => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/155
> > > - cloudstack-www => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83
> > > - cloudstack-cloudmonkey => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/pull/76
> > > - cloudstack-kubernetes-provider => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-kubernetes-provider/pull/29
> > > - cloudstack-ec2stack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-ec2stack/pull/2
> > > - cloudstack-gcestack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-gcestack/pull/3
> > >
> > > 2. Request ASF infra to disable pushes to 'master' branch.
> > >
> > > 3. Rename 'master' branch to 'main' [2][3], and Request ASF infra (open
> > INFRA ticket) to make 'main' as the default branch [4], in GitHub repo
> > settings for all the CloudStack repos. This will also re-target the
> current
> > PRs against 'master' branch to 'main'.
> > >
> > > 3a. The update on the central repo will be done as follows (only by a
> > PMC or Infra member with access)
> > > - Clone the repo (git clone
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack.git)
> > > - Sync local 'master' with the cloudstack repo (cd cloudstack &&
> > git checkout master && git fetch --all -p && git pull)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Push renamed 'main' branch (git push -u origin main)
> > > - Update Default Branch on GitHub [4]
> > > - Delete 'master' branch (git push origin --delete master)
> > > 3b. After the central renaming has been done. New users can clone and
> > directly checkout 'main' branch. Existing users can start using 'main'
> > locally, using the below steps.
> > > - Switch to master branch (git checkout master)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Sync local 'main' with repo (git fetch)
> > > - Remove the existing tracking connection with “origin/master”
> > (git branch --unset-upstream)
> > > - Create a new tracking connection with the new “origin/main”
> > branch (git branch -u origin/main)
> > > - All local branches should still point to the same commit as
> base
> > revision. If there is a problem (git checkout <problematic branch> && git
> > rebase main)
> > >
> > > 4. Update the integrated systems with CloudStack repos, mainly Travis
> CI
> > and Jenkins configuration with 'main' branch. Check and update UI
> building,
> > apidocs, systemvmtemplate builds; project website and docs (cwiki); and
> any
> > other build/release jobs. Track them through the issue:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/4887.
> > >
> > > 5. Perform Health Checks (using a dummy PR), and ensure there are no
> > issues with the build/release configuration. This PR needs to run full
> > matrix of tests. Fix the issues noticed during the health checks.
> > >
> > > 6. Announce the default branch change to 'main' (and 'master'
> > deprecation) on the mailing list.
> > >
> > > The vote will be open until Fri 7th May 2021.
> > >
> > > For sanity in tallying the vote, Can PMC members please be sure to
> > indicate “(binding)” with their vote?
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 approve
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf
> > > [2] https://github.com/github/renaming
> > > [3]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/renaming-a-branch
> > > [4]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/changing-the-default-branch
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Suresh
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
--
Daan
Re: [VOTE] Renaming default git branch name from 'master' to 'main'
and replace offensive words as appropriate for inclusiveness
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
Hi Suresh,
I understand all that, thanks for reaching out. I shared what I had to
share, I definitively did not have any intention to start any further
discussion (as there was a dedicated ML thread for that, which I somehow
missed) nor to block this, considered by some, positive movement in our
community.
I'm changing my vote to +0.
Best,
Andrija
On Mon, 3 May 2021 at 12:29, Suresh Anaparti <Su...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> Hi Andrija,
>
> Thanks for sharing your comments here.
>
> The objective of the change is not about changing the offensive words and
> political correctness, but mainly it is to make the community more
> inclusive to people that might think so. This brings in a culture of
> Inclusion and Diversity. The word "master" is indeed not as unambiguously
> offensive as for instance its counterpart "slave", and this is perceived
> differently in different cultures. I hope you understand, keeping this in
> mind.
>
> Regards,
> Suresh
>
> On 02/05/21, 1:46 AM, "Daan Hoogland" <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see a lot of arguments here that I would have liked to see on the
> discussion thread. Let's go back to that. BTW I disagree with most of
> them
> but they do need addressing in a discussion and keeping the voting
> thread
> open does not make sense.
> I don't care about political correctness one bit, but I do care about
> inclusivity if it aims to not scare away potential good developers.
> <politics mode=incorrect>
> I really think all those arguments against are excrements of male
> cattle.
> </politics>
> Please, all bring your arguments to the discussion thread,
> https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf .
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:28 PM Andrija Panic <
> andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > -1 (non-binding)
> > (even though I'm a PMC member - I believe I have the right to cast a
> > non-binding vote? Otherwise I would change it to 0)
> >
> >
> > Explanation:
> >
> > While I do know where this comes from, and while my following
> comment has
> > NOTHING to do with the person who raised it (my own colleague who I
> > appreciate very much), I have to state my "no -opinion" for this
> vote/topic
> > in general:
> >
> >
> > 1. What is offensive with the word "master" - shall we ask it's
> removed
> > from the dictionary as well?, shall we ask words like "slave",
> "black",
> > "white" and other extremes to be removed? Shall we remove words male
> /
> > female (or even HE/SHE let it just be IT) so that everyone is unisex
> and
> > shall we change...let's change the whole world...
> >
> > 2. This whole movement (in wild) is the absolute political bullshit
> > (apologies for sharp tongue), utter nonsense which will make
> nobody's life
> > better, or make "slaved" people more free, or will allow people in
> many
> > countries to have a free walk (during this "pandemic" times), etc,
> etc.
> > Real-life (outside of computer) freedoms are DRASTICALLY cut down,
> against
> > all laws and constitution in many countries, but we are changing
> branch
> > names, renaming "master" to "main" (for the record, I might find the
> word
> > "main" offending to me, so I might raise another vote for something
> even
> > more neutral...) and making some changes which change nothing for
> anyone.
> >
> > Removing "master" and "slave" will not erase the history, which
> was... what
> > it was...ugly and full of blood and misery for some. And history,
> should
> > not be forgotten - because we learn from it about bad things in
> order for
> > them to NOT happen again.
> >
> > //political uncoretness off
> > //rant off
> > peace to the world
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 17:53, Nathan McGarvey <
> nathanmcgarvey@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1, -1, and +0:
> > >
> > > Overall idea: +1 (Agree with Rene regarding context being
> important,
> > > too.)
> > >
> > >
> > > Some specific pull requests: -1 or 0:
> > >
> > > -1: How is this related? It seems to be a commit that
> shouldn't
> > > have been a part of this pull request since it is a brand new file
> that
> > > is unrelated:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9545ce619b377326daae5b303ffe89b5ea90a288
> > >
> > >
> > > +0 or -1: I can't reasonably review this:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9ce732ceeb47bf6dee73073d892a51fbeea39f09
> > > as it changed over 5000 files going back many many years in the
> past to
> > > now-dead/unmaintained code. This is a huge repo-bloat commit of
> doom.
> > > (You're changing API docs for dead code on something that can't
> even be
> > > manually reviewed). I'd suggest just adding an explanatory file for
> > > unsupported releases instead of changing thousands of files that
> are a
> > > decade old. Maybe even removing old API docs would be an option.
> Or just
> > > change the latest X releases, and gracefully age off the old ones.
> > > (Related: How much bigger does this make the git repo and how much
> > > longer does it take to apply diffs when cloning?)
> > >
> > >
> > > Other questions/comments:
> > >
> > > Is there a overarching ASF criteria for what words are
> > > inappropriate for future development?
> > >
> > > Should there be git hooks similar to scan for such terms?
> > >
> > > How about when upstream projects use a inappropriate term?
> E.g.
> > > MySQL pre-8.0.23 uses "master" in their configs, variables, and
> > > documents, but uses "replication source" or "replica", etc. after
> that
> > > point in time. (Ref:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/binlog-replication-configuration-overview.html
> > > )
> > > Having a disjuncture between the implementation code and the
> upstream
> > > project makes it really hard to cross-reference documentation. The
> > > client/conf/db.properties.in file was changed to be
> db.cloud.backup, but
> > > why not make that db.cloud.replica or something that lines up with
> their
> > > documentation? Another example is with network interfaces. The
> "slave"
> > > term is different than the proposed "secondary" in Linux. A
> secondary
> > > interface actually means an alias or a fully separate physical
> device.
> > > Maybe "member device" or something is more correct.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Nathan McGarvey
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/30/21 6:43 AM, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Following the discussion thread on renaming default git branch
> name and
> > > inclusiveness [1], I would like to start a vote to gather
> consensus on
> > the
> > > following plan:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Accept the following rename PRs (raised against 'master'
> branch)
> > > which renames git default branch to 'main' and replaces some
> offensive
> > > words, and Merge them post acceptance.
> > > > - cloudstack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4922
> > > > - cloudstack-documentation => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/155
> > > > - cloudstack-www => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83
> > > > - cloudstack-cloudmonkey => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/pull/76
> > > > - cloudstack-kubernetes-provider => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-kubernetes-provider/pull/29
> > > > - cloudstack-ec2stack => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-ec2stack/pull/2
> > > > - cloudstack-gcestack => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-gcestack/pull/3
> > > >
> > > > 2. Request ASF infra to disable pushes to 'master' branch.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Rename 'master' branch to 'main' [2][3], and Request ASF
> infra (open
> > > INFRA ticket) to make 'main' as the default branch [4], in GitHub
> repo
> > > settings for all the CloudStack repos. This will also re-target the
> > current
> > > PRs against 'master' branch to 'main'.
> > > >
> > > > 3a. The update on the central repo will be done as follows (only
> by a
> > > PMC or Infra member with access)
> > > > - Clone the repo (git clone
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack.git)
> > > > - Sync local 'master' with the cloudstack repo (cd
> cloudstack &&
> > > git checkout master && git fetch --all -p && git pull)
> > > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m
> master
> > > main)
> > > > - Push renamed 'main' branch (git push -u origin main)
> > > > - Update Default Branch on GitHub [4]
> > > > - Delete 'master' branch (git push origin --delete master)
> > > > 3b. After the central renaming has been done. New users can
> clone and
> > > directly checkout 'main' branch. Existing users can start using
> 'main'
> > > locally, using the below steps.
> > > > - Switch to master branch (git checkout master)
> > > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m
> master
> > > main)
> > > > - Sync local 'main' with repo (git fetch)
> > > > - Remove the existing tracking connection with
> “origin/master”
> > > (git branch --unset-upstream)
> > > > - Create a new tracking connection with the new
> “origin/main”
> > > branch (git branch -u origin/main)
> > > > - All local branches should still point to the same commit
> as
> > base
> > > revision. If there is a problem (git checkout <problematic branch>
> && git
> > > rebase main)
> > > >
> > > > 4. Update the integrated systems with CloudStack repos, mainly
> Travis
> > CI
> > > and Jenkins configuration with 'main' branch. Check and update UI
> > building,
> > > apidocs, systemvmtemplate builds; project website and docs
> (cwiki); and
> > any
> > > other build/release jobs. Track them through the issue:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/4887.
> > > >
> > > > 5. Perform Health Checks (using a dummy PR), and ensure there
> are no
> > > issues with the build/release configuration. This PR needs to run
> full
> > > matrix of tests. Fix the issues noticed during the health checks.
> > > >
> > > > 6. Announce the default branch change to 'main' (and 'master'
> > > deprecation) on the mailing list.
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open until Fri 7th May 2021.
> > > >
> > > > For sanity in tallying the vote, Can PMC members please be sure
> to
> > > indicate “(binding)” with their vote?
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1 approve
> > > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf
> > > > [2] https://github.com/github/renaming
> > > > [3]
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/renaming-a-branch
> > > > [4]
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/changing-the-default-branch
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Suresh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrija Panić
> >
>
>
> --
> Daan
>
>
>
>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: [VOTE] Renaming default git branch name from 'master' to 'main'
and replace offensive words as appropriate for inclusiveness
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
Hi Suresh,
I understand all that, thanks for reaching out. I shared what I had to
share, I definitively did not have any intention to start any further
discussion (as there was a dedicated ML thread for that, which I somehow
missed) nor to block this, considered by some, positive movement in our
community.
I'm changing my vote to +0.
Best,
Andrija
On Mon, 3 May 2021 at 12:29, Suresh Anaparti <Su...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> Hi Andrija,
>
> Thanks for sharing your comments here.
>
> The objective of the change is not about changing the offensive words and
> political correctness, but mainly it is to make the community more
> inclusive to people that might think so. This brings in a culture of
> Inclusion and Diversity. The word "master" is indeed not as unambiguously
> offensive as for instance its counterpart "slave", and this is perceived
> differently in different cultures. I hope you understand, keeping this in
> mind.
>
> Regards,
> Suresh
>
> On 02/05/21, 1:46 AM, "Daan Hoogland" <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see a lot of arguments here that I would have liked to see on the
> discussion thread. Let's go back to that. BTW I disagree with most of
> them
> but they do need addressing in a discussion and keeping the voting
> thread
> open does not make sense.
> I don't care about political correctness one bit, but I do care about
> inclusivity if it aims to not scare away potential good developers.
> <politics mode=incorrect>
> I really think all those arguments against are excrements of male
> cattle.
> </politics>
> Please, all bring your arguments to the discussion thread,
> https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf .
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:28 PM Andrija Panic <
> andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > -1 (non-binding)
> > (even though I'm a PMC member - I believe I have the right to cast a
> > non-binding vote? Otherwise I would change it to 0)
> >
> >
> > Explanation:
> >
> > While I do know where this comes from, and while my following
> comment has
> > NOTHING to do with the person who raised it (my own colleague who I
> > appreciate very much), I have to state my "no -opinion" for this
> vote/topic
> > in general:
> >
> >
> > 1. What is offensive with the word "master" - shall we ask it's
> removed
> > from the dictionary as well?, shall we ask words like "slave",
> "black",
> > "white" and other extremes to be removed? Shall we remove words male
> /
> > female (or even HE/SHE let it just be IT) so that everyone is unisex
> and
> > shall we change...let's change the whole world...
> >
> > 2. This whole movement (in wild) is the absolute political bullshit
> > (apologies for sharp tongue), utter nonsense which will make
> nobody's life
> > better, or make "slaved" people more free, or will allow people in
> many
> > countries to have a free walk (during this "pandemic" times), etc,
> etc.
> > Real-life (outside of computer) freedoms are DRASTICALLY cut down,
> against
> > all laws and constitution in many countries, but we are changing
> branch
> > names, renaming "master" to "main" (for the record, I might find the
> word
> > "main" offending to me, so I might raise another vote for something
> even
> > more neutral...) and making some changes which change nothing for
> anyone.
> >
> > Removing "master" and "slave" will not erase the history, which
> was... what
> > it was...ugly and full of blood and misery for some. And history,
> should
> > not be forgotten - because we learn from it about bad things in
> order for
> > them to NOT happen again.
> >
> > //political uncoretness off
> > //rant off
> > peace to the world
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 17:53, Nathan McGarvey <
> nathanmcgarvey@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1, -1, and +0:
> > >
> > > Overall idea: +1 (Agree with Rene regarding context being
> important,
> > > too.)
> > >
> > >
> > > Some specific pull requests: -1 or 0:
> > >
> > > -1: How is this related? It seems to be a commit that
> shouldn't
> > > have been a part of this pull request since it is a brand new file
> that
> > > is unrelated:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9545ce619b377326daae5b303ffe89b5ea90a288
> > >
> > >
> > > +0 or -1: I can't reasonably review this:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9ce732ceeb47bf6dee73073d892a51fbeea39f09
> > > as it changed over 5000 files going back many many years in the
> past to
> > > now-dead/unmaintained code. This is a huge repo-bloat commit of
> doom.
> > > (You're changing API docs for dead code on something that can't
> even be
> > > manually reviewed). I'd suggest just adding an explanatory file for
> > > unsupported releases instead of changing thousands of files that
> are a
> > > decade old. Maybe even removing old API docs would be an option.
> Or just
> > > change the latest X releases, and gracefully age off the old ones.
> > > (Related: How much bigger does this make the git repo and how much
> > > longer does it take to apply diffs when cloning?)
> > >
> > >
> > > Other questions/comments:
> > >
> > > Is there a overarching ASF criteria for what words are
> > > inappropriate for future development?
> > >
> > > Should there be git hooks similar to scan for such terms?
> > >
> > > How about when upstream projects use a inappropriate term?
> E.g.
> > > MySQL pre-8.0.23 uses "master" in their configs, variables, and
> > > documents, but uses "replication source" or "replica", etc. after
> that
> > > point in time. (Ref:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/binlog-replication-configuration-overview.html
> > > )
> > > Having a disjuncture between the implementation code and the
> upstream
> > > project makes it really hard to cross-reference documentation. The
> > > client/conf/db.properties.in file was changed to be
> db.cloud.backup, but
> > > why not make that db.cloud.replica or something that lines up with
> their
> > > documentation? Another example is with network interfaces. The
> "slave"
> > > term is different than the proposed "secondary" in Linux. A
> secondary
> > > interface actually means an alias or a fully separate physical
> device.
> > > Maybe "member device" or something is more correct.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Nathan McGarvey
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/30/21 6:43 AM, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Following the discussion thread on renaming default git branch
> name and
> > > inclusiveness [1], I would like to start a vote to gather
> consensus on
> > the
> > > following plan:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Accept the following rename PRs (raised against 'master'
> branch)
> > > which renames git default branch to 'main' and replaces some
> offensive
> > > words, and Merge them post acceptance.
> > > > - cloudstack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4922
> > > > - cloudstack-documentation => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/155
> > > > - cloudstack-www => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83
> > > > - cloudstack-cloudmonkey => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/pull/76
> > > > - cloudstack-kubernetes-provider => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-kubernetes-provider/pull/29
> > > > - cloudstack-ec2stack => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-ec2stack/pull/2
> > > > - cloudstack-gcestack => PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-gcestack/pull/3
> > > >
> > > > 2. Request ASF infra to disable pushes to 'master' branch.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Rename 'master' branch to 'main' [2][3], and Request ASF
> infra (open
> > > INFRA ticket) to make 'main' as the default branch [4], in GitHub
> repo
> > > settings for all the CloudStack repos. This will also re-target the
> > current
> > > PRs against 'master' branch to 'main'.
> > > >
> > > > 3a. The update on the central repo will be done as follows (only
> by a
> > > PMC or Infra member with access)
> > > > - Clone the repo (git clone
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack.git)
> > > > - Sync local 'master' with the cloudstack repo (cd
> cloudstack &&
> > > git checkout master && git fetch --all -p && git pull)
> > > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m
> master
> > > main)
> > > > - Push renamed 'main' branch (git push -u origin main)
> > > > - Update Default Branch on GitHub [4]
> > > > - Delete 'master' branch (git push origin --delete master)
> > > > 3b. After the central renaming has been done. New users can
> clone and
> > > directly checkout 'main' branch. Existing users can start using
> 'main'
> > > locally, using the below steps.
> > > > - Switch to master branch (git checkout master)
> > > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m
> master
> > > main)
> > > > - Sync local 'main' with repo (git fetch)
> > > > - Remove the existing tracking connection with
> “origin/master”
> > > (git branch --unset-upstream)
> > > > - Create a new tracking connection with the new
> “origin/main”
> > > branch (git branch -u origin/main)
> > > > - All local branches should still point to the same commit
> as
> > base
> > > revision. If there is a problem (git checkout <problematic branch>
> && git
> > > rebase main)
> > > >
> > > > 4. Update the integrated systems with CloudStack repos, mainly
> Travis
> > CI
> > > and Jenkins configuration with 'main' branch. Check and update UI
> > building,
> > > apidocs, systemvmtemplate builds; project website and docs
> (cwiki); and
> > any
> > > other build/release jobs. Track them through the issue:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/4887.
> > > >
> > > > 5. Perform Health Checks (using a dummy PR), and ensure there
> are no
> > > issues with the build/release configuration. This PR needs to run
> full
> > > matrix of tests. Fix the issues noticed during the health checks.
> > > >
> > > > 6. Announce the default branch change to 'main' (and 'master'
> > > deprecation) on the mailing list.
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open until Fri 7th May 2021.
> > > >
> > > > For sanity in tallying the vote, Can PMC members please be sure
> to
> > > indicate “(binding)” with their vote?
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1 approve
> > > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf
> > > > [2] https://github.com/github/renaming
> > > > [3]
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/renaming-a-branch
> > > > [4]
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/changing-the-default-branch
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Suresh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrija Panić
> >
>
>
> --
> Daan
>
>
>
>
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: [VOTE] Renaming default git branch name from 'master'
to 'main' and replace offensive words as appropriate for inclusiveness
Posted by Suresh Anaparti <Su...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Andrija,
Thanks for sharing your comments here.
The objective of the change is not about changing the offensive words and political correctness, but mainly it is to make the community more inclusive to people that might think so. This brings in a culture of Inclusion and Diversity. The word "master" is indeed not as unambiguously offensive as for instance its counterpart "slave", and this is perceived differently in different cultures. I hope you understand, keeping this in mind.
Regards,
Suresh
On 02/05/21, 1:46 AM, "Daan Hoogland" <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
I see a lot of arguments here that I would have liked to see on the
discussion thread. Let's go back to that. BTW I disagree with most of them
but they do need addressing in a discussion and keeping the voting thread
open does not make sense.
I don't care about political correctness one bit, but I do care about
inclusivity if it aims to not scare away potential good developers.
<politics mode=incorrect>
I really think all those arguments against are excrements of male cattle.
</politics>
Please, all bring your arguments to the discussion thread,
https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf .
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:28 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
> (even though I'm a PMC member - I believe I have the right to cast a
> non-binding vote? Otherwise I would change it to 0)
>
>
> Explanation:
>
> While I do know where this comes from, and while my following comment has
> NOTHING to do with the person who raised it (my own colleague who I
> appreciate very much), I have to state my "no -opinion" for this vote/topic
> in general:
>
>
> 1. What is offensive with the word "master" - shall we ask it's removed
> from the dictionary as well?, shall we ask words like "slave", "black",
> "white" and other extremes to be removed? Shall we remove words male /
> female (or even HE/SHE let it just be IT) so that everyone is unisex and
> shall we change...let's change the whole world...
>
> 2. This whole movement (in wild) is the absolute political bullshit
> (apologies for sharp tongue), utter nonsense which will make nobody's life
> better, or make "slaved" people more free, or will allow people in many
> countries to have a free walk (during this "pandemic" times), etc, etc.
> Real-life (outside of computer) freedoms are DRASTICALLY cut down, against
> all laws and constitution in many countries, but we are changing branch
> names, renaming "master" to "main" (for the record, I might find the word
> "main" offending to me, so I might raise another vote for something even
> more neutral...) and making some changes which change nothing for anyone.
>
> Removing "master" and "slave" will not erase the history, which was... what
> it was...ugly and full of blood and misery for some. And history, should
> not be forgotten - because we learn from it about bad things in order for
> them to NOT happen again.
>
> //political uncoretness off
> //rant off
> peace to the world
>
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 17:53, Nathan McGarvey <na...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1, -1, and +0:
> >
> > Overall idea: +1 (Agree with Rene regarding context being important,
> > too.)
> >
> >
> > Some specific pull requests: -1 or 0:
> >
> > -1: How is this related? It seems to be a commit that shouldn't
> > have been a part of this pull request since it is a brand new file that
> > is unrelated:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9545ce619b377326daae5b303ffe89b5ea90a288
> >
> >
> > +0 or -1: I can't reasonably review this:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9ce732ceeb47bf6dee73073d892a51fbeea39f09
> > as it changed over 5000 files going back many many years in the past to
> > now-dead/unmaintained code. This is a huge repo-bloat commit of doom.
> > (You're changing API docs for dead code on something that can't even be
> > manually reviewed). I'd suggest just adding an explanatory file for
> > unsupported releases instead of changing thousands of files that are a
> > decade old. Maybe even removing old API docs would be an option. Or just
> > change the latest X releases, and gracefully age off the old ones.
> > (Related: How much bigger does this make the git repo and how much
> > longer does it take to apply diffs when cloning?)
> >
> >
> > Other questions/comments:
> >
> > Is there a overarching ASF criteria for what words are
> > inappropriate for future development?
> >
> > Should there be git hooks similar to scan for such terms?
> >
> > How about when upstream projects use a inappropriate term? E.g.
> > MySQL pre-8.0.23 uses "master" in their configs, variables, and
> > documents, but uses "replication source" or "replica", etc. after that
> > point in time. (Ref:
> >
> >
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/binlog-replication-configuration-overview.html
> > )
> > Having a disjuncture between the implementation code and the upstream
> > project makes it really hard to cross-reference documentation. The
> > client/conf/db.properties.in file was changed to be db.cloud.backup, but
> > why not make that db.cloud.replica or something that lines up with their
> > documentation? Another example is with network interfaces. The "slave"
> > term is different than the proposed "secondary" in Linux. A secondary
> > interface actually means an alias or a fully separate physical device.
> > Maybe "member device" or something is more correct.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Nathan McGarvey
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/30/21 6:43 AM, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Following the discussion thread on renaming default git branch name and
> > inclusiveness [1], I would like to start a vote to gather consensus on
> the
> > following plan:
> > >
> > > 1. Accept the following rename PRs (raised against 'master' branch)
> > which renames git default branch to 'main' and replaces some offensive
> > words, and Merge them post acceptance.
> > > - cloudstack => PR:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4922
> > > - cloudstack-documentation => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/155
> > > - cloudstack-www => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83
> > > - cloudstack-cloudmonkey => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/pull/76
> > > - cloudstack-kubernetes-provider => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-kubernetes-provider/pull/29
> > > - cloudstack-ec2stack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-ec2stack/pull/2
> > > - cloudstack-gcestack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-gcestack/pull/3
> > >
> > > 2. Request ASF infra to disable pushes to 'master' branch.
> > >
> > > 3. Rename 'master' branch to 'main' [2][3], and Request ASF infra (open
> > INFRA ticket) to make 'main' as the default branch [4], in GitHub repo
> > settings for all the CloudStack repos. This will also re-target the
> current
> > PRs against 'master' branch to 'main'.
> > >
> > > 3a. The update on the central repo will be done as follows (only by a
> > PMC or Infra member with access)
> > > - Clone the repo (git clone
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack.git)
> > > - Sync local 'master' with the cloudstack repo (cd cloudstack &&
> > git checkout master && git fetch --all -p && git pull)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Push renamed 'main' branch (git push -u origin main)
> > > - Update Default Branch on GitHub [4]
> > > - Delete 'master' branch (git push origin --delete master)
> > > 3b. After the central renaming has been done. New users can clone and
> > directly checkout 'main' branch. Existing users can start using 'main'
> > locally, using the below steps.
> > > - Switch to master branch (git checkout master)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Sync local 'main' with repo (git fetch)
> > > - Remove the existing tracking connection with “origin/master”
> > (git branch --unset-upstream)
> > > - Create a new tracking connection with the new “origin/main”
> > branch (git branch -u origin/main)
> > > - All local branches should still point to the same commit as
> base
> > revision. If there is a problem (git checkout <problematic branch> && git
> > rebase main)
> > >
> > > 4. Update the integrated systems with CloudStack repos, mainly Travis
> CI
> > and Jenkins configuration with 'main' branch. Check and update UI
> building,
> > apidocs, systemvmtemplate builds; project website and docs (cwiki); and
> any
> > other build/release jobs. Track them through the issue:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/4887.
> > >
> > > 5. Perform Health Checks (using a dummy PR), and ensure there are no
> > issues with the build/release configuration. This PR needs to run full
> > matrix of tests. Fix the issues noticed during the health checks.
> > >
> > > 6. Announce the default branch change to 'main' (and 'master'
> > deprecation) on the mailing list.
> > >
> > > The vote will be open until Fri 7th May 2021.
> > >
> > > For sanity in tallying the vote, Can PMC members please be sure to
> > indicate “(binding)” with their vote?
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 approve
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf
> > > [2] https://github.com/github/renaming
> > > [3]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/renaming-a-branch
> > > [4]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/changing-the-default-branch
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Suresh
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
--
Daan
Re: [VOTE] Renaming default git branch name from 'master'
to 'main' and replace offensive words as appropriate for inclusiveness
Posted by Suresh Anaparti <Su...@shapeblue.com>.
Hi Andrija,
Thanks for sharing your comments here.
The objective of the change is not about changing the offensive words and political correctness, but mainly it is to make the community more inclusive to people that might think so. This brings in a culture of Inclusion and Diversity. The word "master" is indeed not as unambiguously offensive as for instance its counterpart "slave", and this is perceived differently in different cultures. I hope you understand, keeping this in mind.
Regards,
Suresh
On 02/05/21, 1:46 AM, "Daan Hoogland" <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
I see a lot of arguments here that I would have liked to see on the
discussion thread. Let's go back to that. BTW I disagree with most of them
but they do need addressing in a discussion and keeping the voting thread
open does not make sense.
I don't care about political correctness one bit, but I do care about
inclusivity if it aims to not scare away potential good developers.
<politics mode=incorrect>
I really think all those arguments against are excrements of male cattle.
</politics>
Please, all bring your arguments to the discussion thread,
https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf .
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:28 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
> (even though I'm a PMC member - I believe I have the right to cast a
> non-binding vote? Otherwise I would change it to 0)
>
>
> Explanation:
>
> While I do know where this comes from, and while my following comment has
> NOTHING to do with the person who raised it (my own colleague who I
> appreciate very much), I have to state my "no -opinion" for this vote/topic
> in general:
>
>
> 1. What is offensive with the word "master" - shall we ask it's removed
> from the dictionary as well?, shall we ask words like "slave", "black",
> "white" and other extremes to be removed? Shall we remove words male /
> female (or even HE/SHE let it just be IT) so that everyone is unisex and
> shall we change...let's change the whole world...
>
> 2. This whole movement (in wild) is the absolute political bullshit
> (apologies for sharp tongue), utter nonsense which will make nobody's life
> better, or make "slaved" people more free, or will allow people in many
> countries to have a free walk (during this "pandemic" times), etc, etc.
> Real-life (outside of computer) freedoms are DRASTICALLY cut down, against
> all laws and constitution in many countries, but we are changing branch
> names, renaming "master" to "main" (for the record, I might find the word
> "main" offending to me, so I might raise another vote for something even
> more neutral...) and making some changes which change nothing for anyone.
>
> Removing "master" and "slave" will not erase the history, which was... what
> it was...ugly and full of blood and misery for some. And history, should
> not be forgotten - because we learn from it about bad things in order for
> them to NOT happen again.
>
> //political uncoretness off
> //rant off
> peace to the world
>
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 17:53, Nathan McGarvey <na...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1, -1, and +0:
> >
> > Overall idea: +1 (Agree with Rene regarding context being important,
> > too.)
> >
> >
> > Some specific pull requests: -1 or 0:
> >
> > -1: How is this related? It seems to be a commit that shouldn't
> > have been a part of this pull request since it is a brand new file that
> > is unrelated:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9545ce619b377326daae5b303ffe89b5ea90a288
> >
> >
> > +0 or -1: I can't reasonably review this:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83/commits/9ce732ceeb47bf6dee73073d892a51fbeea39f09
> > as it changed over 5000 files going back many many years in the past to
> > now-dead/unmaintained code. This is a huge repo-bloat commit of doom.
> > (You're changing API docs for dead code on something that can't even be
> > manually reviewed). I'd suggest just adding an explanatory file for
> > unsupported releases instead of changing thousands of files that are a
> > decade old. Maybe even removing old API docs would be an option. Or just
> > change the latest X releases, and gracefully age off the old ones.
> > (Related: How much bigger does this make the git repo and how much
> > longer does it take to apply diffs when cloning?)
> >
> >
> > Other questions/comments:
> >
> > Is there a overarching ASF criteria for what words are
> > inappropriate for future development?
> >
> > Should there be git hooks similar to scan for such terms?
> >
> > How about when upstream projects use a inappropriate term? E.g.
> > MySQL pre-8.0.23 uses "master" in their configs, variables, and
> > documents, but uses "replication source" or "replica", etc. after that
> > point in time. (Ref:
> >
> >
> https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/binlog-replication-configuration-overview.html
> > )
> > Having a disjuncture between the implementation code and the upstream
> > project makes it really hard to cross-reference documentation. The
> > client/conf/db.properties.in file was changed to be db.cloud.backup, but
> > why not make that db.cloud.replica or something that lines up with their
> > documentation? Another example is with network interfaces. The "slave"
> > term is different than the proposed "secondary" in Linux. A secondary
> > interface actually means an alias or a fully separate physical device.
> > Maybe "member device" or something is more correct.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Nathan McGarvey
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/30/21 6:43 AM, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Following the discussion thread on renaming default git branch name and
> > inclusiveness [1], I would like to start a vote to gather consensus on
> the
> > following plan:
> > >
> > > 1. Accept the following rename PRs (raised against 'master' branch)
> > which renames git default branch to 'main' and replaces some offensive
> > words, and Merge them post acceptance.
> > > - cloudstack => PR:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4922
> > > - cloudstack-documentation => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/155
> > > - cloudstack-www => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/pull/83
> > > - cloudstack-cloudmonkey => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/pull/76
> > > - cloudstack-kubernetes-provider => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-kubernetes-provider/pull/29
> > > - cloudstack-ec2stack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-ec2stack/pull/2
> > > - cloudstack-gcestack => PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-gcestack/pull/3
> > >
> > > 2. Request ASF infra to disable pushes to 'master' branch.
> > >
> > > 3. Rename 'master' branch to 'main' [2][3], and Request ASF infra (open
> > INFRA ticket) to make 'main' as the default branch [4], in GitHub repo
> > settings for all the CloudStack repos. This will also re-target the
> current
> > PRs against 'master' branch to 'main'.
> > >
> > > 3a. The update on the central repo will be done as follows (only by a
> > PMC or Infra member with access)
> > > - Clone the repo (git clone
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack.git)
> > > - Sync local 'master' with the cloudstack repo (cd cloudstack &&
> > git checkout master && git fetch --all -p && git pull)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Push renamed 'main' branch (git push -u origin main)
> > > - Update Default Branch on GitHub [4]
> > > - Delete 'master' branch (git push origin --delete master)
> > > 3b. After the central renaming has been done. New users can clone and
> > directly checkout 'main' branch. Existing users can start using 'main'
> > locally, using the below steps.
> > > - Switch to master branch (git checkout master)
> > > - Rename local 'master' branch to 'main' (git branch -m master
> > main)
> > > - Sync local 'main' with repo (git fetch)
> > > - Remove the existing tracking connection with “origin/master”
> > (git branch --unset-upstream)
> > > - Create a new tracking connection with the new “origin/main”
> > branch (git branch -u origin/main)
> > > - All local branches should still point to the same commit as
> base
> > revision. If there is a problem (git checkout <problematic branch> && git
> > rebase main)
> > >
> > > 4. Update the integrated systems with CloudStack repos, mainly Travis
> CI
> > and Jenkins configuration with 'main' branch. Check and update UI
> building,
> > apidocs, systemvmtemplate builds; project website and docs (cwiki); and
> any
> > other build/release jobs. Track them through the issue:
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/4887.
> > >
> > > 5. Perform Health Checks (using a dummy PR), and ensure there are no
> > issues with the build/release configuration. This PR needs to run full
> > matrix of tests. Fix the issues noticed during the health checks.
> > >
> > > 6. Announce the default branch change to 'main' (and 'master'
> > deprecation) on the mailing list.
> > >
> > > The vote will be open until Fri 7th May 2021.
> > >
> > > For sanity in tallying the vote, Can PMC members please be sure to
> > indicate “(binding)” with their vote?
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 approve
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > [1] https://markmail.org/message/k767evgjnmzogyhf
> > > [2] https://github.com/github/renaming
> > > [3]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/renaming-a-branch
> > > [4]
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/changing-the-default-branch
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Suresh
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
--
Daan