I have no objection other than maybe the work it puts on the writer to learn the new terminology. Personally I don't typically think along those lines and I can see where it might be easy for someone to accidentally use a word out of habit and not even realize that it is one that has been flagged by the community as an offensive word. My only request is that the writers/editors not be expected to learn a long list of words to constantly be thinking about and watching out for. I would rather the list be loaded into the spelling autocorrect system somehow. My two cents, gb On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:55 PM Paul Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 5:23 PM Eric Gustavsson <egustavs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Raising my opinion as well. As a Swedish person, I've always > > associated whitelists as a list of things you can see, since white is > > bright. > > Likewise for blacklists as something in the darkness that you cannot see. > > > > I'm sure you can understand, though, why our associations in this case are > less relevant. > > I personally would use the same connotation as the project I'm writing > > about. > > If I'm writing about Redis I will write about master-replica. > > Likewise if I'm writing about something that uses whitelist/blacklist > > wording, I will use that as well. > > > > Using a different connotation than is documented is just confusing. > > > > While I agree upstream references may make this difficult there are still > actions we can take, such as a note to the effect of the objectionable > language, and (if it exists) a link to upstream discussion. We can also > work around with a clear note at the top of an article explaining the > language we will use. > > I wouldn't edit the Fedora Magazine article either, even though > > allowlist/denylist 100% makes more sense in firewalld the article > > talks about it as a problem and proposes a solution - their > > firewalld-blacklist package. > > If it was to be edited across the article to mention denylist instead, > > and in the end link to a firewalld-blacklist package they created, one > > would be confused as to why it was coded with one word and released > > with a different one. > > > > This seems a weak problem. After all we have many -devel packages that > contain mainly headers. > > I would vote for discouraging master/slave, and blacklist/whitelist as > > long as it makes sense and doesn't take away any meaning that needs to > > be explained. > > > > Having a style guide sounds great, I'm presuming something like > > codespell can correct custom words as well like RedHat, > > NetworkManager, fedora, etc. > > > > I do agree we avoid creating confusion, but this can be done in many ways > that avoid simply falling back to status quo. > > -- > Paul > _______________________________________________ > Fedora Magazine mailing list -- magazine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to magazine-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/magazine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ Fedora Magazine mailing list -- magazine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to magazine-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/magazine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
