Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename master branch to main #1308

Closed
mp911de opened this issue Jun 13, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Rename master branch to main #1308

mp911de opened this issue Jun 13, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
for: team-attention An issue we need to discuss as a team to make progress type: task A general task
Milestone

Comments

@mp911de
Copy link
Collaborator

mp911de commented Jun 13, 2020

Until recently, I haven’t fully considered the racist connotations of terms like whitelist and blacklist and master. While we had efforts a while ago (#845), we want to reduce wording that is connotated with oppressive (racist) language hence we should revisit branch names and documentation for wording improvements.

@mp911de mp911de added for: team-attention An issue we need to discuss as a team to make progress type: task A general task labels Jun 13, 2020
@mp911de mp911de added this to the 6.0 RC1 milestone Jun 13, 2020
@mp911de mp911de closed this as completed Jun 13, 2020
mp911de added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 13, 2020
Where possible, we replace master with upstream and slave with replica such as blacklist of nodes with rejection of nodes to preserve their expressiveness.
@perlun
Copy link
Contributor

perlun commented Nov 13, 2020

Very late to the party, but I happened to see the UPSTREAM-terminology being used now while looking at the Lettuce Wiki for Lettuce 6. I'm not so sure this deprecation fully makes sense @mp911de. Lettuce is a Redis driver and AFAIK, Redis uses the "master-replication" terminology, as in https://redis.io/topics/replication. Note how that page quite elegantly avoids using the word "slave", which I think is the more potentially offensive language.

"Upstream", AFAIK, is not a word that is being actively used in Redis terminology (please correct me if I'm wrong!), so us using it feels like it does more harm than good.

(More upstream Redis discussion can be found in this issue: redis/redis#5335, as well as @antirez blog post from a couple of years ago: http://antirez.com/news/122)


TL;DR: As far as I understand it, Redis uses the "master-replication" terminology. I think we are doing ourselves and the community harm if we deviate from this terminology, it just confusing. If you think this terminology is wrong/bad, I think we should try to get Redis to stop using it as well.

@mp911de
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mp911de commented Nov 13, 2020

Thanks for chiming in @perlun. We were a bit more progressive on the client side and not fully sure how using Upstream instead of Master will turn out. We always have the chance to reinstate the old master-replica wording. Can you file a ticket and add your comment as description?

@perlun
Copy link
Contributor

perlun commented Nov 13, 2020

We were a bit more progressive on the client side and not fully sure how using Upstream instead of Master will turn out. We always have the chance to reinstate the old master-replica wording. Can you file a ticket and add your comment as description?

Thanks for listening, appreciated. 👍

I filed #1518 about this now, let's move the discussion there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
for: team-attention An issue we need to discuss as a team to make progress type: task A general task
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants