1. -2
  1. 13

    Before we go on and on about “SJW’s” or whatever:

    We get it. You think the terms aren’t offensive. I agree with you.

    Some people do think the terms are offensive, or at least antiquated and indecorous. You think those people are misguided. I don’t agree with you, because what is offensive to one person is not necessarily so to another.

    Whether you think they are misguided or not is immaterial. Jackbooted thugs aren’t coming to your house to make sure you no longer use such terms. The evil government isn’t making this a law. A group of people who voluntarily associate with one another have decided that their voluntary association’s rules of decorum have changed, as such rules have done before and will do again.

    The euphemism treadmill will run on, as it has done since the dawn of language. It is not a recent phenomenon nor is it isolated to “one side” of anything.

    Getting upset about it while claiming the “other side is too sensitive” is…lacking in self-awareness at best.

    1. 1

      because what is offensive to one person is not necessarily so to another.

      Agreed. That being the case, let’s just err on the side of existing code and skip wasting cycles when there are so many more important things to worry about.

      A lot of folks also can’t help but notice that the bar to entry for complaining about this stuff (or adding codes of conduct, or tweeting for/against something, or complaining about how a BFDL writes emails, or whatever else) is so low as to seemingly specifically invite mobs.

      This stuff wastes all of our time and tends to push out people that have just quietly been getting shit done–but somehow that never gets covered.

      1. 4

        That being the case, let’s just err on the side of existing code and skip wasting cycles when there are so many more important things to worry about.

        There are starving children in Africa so I shouldn’t mow my lawn.

        To be less pithy: writing code is more important than complaining about this sort of thing, but a lot of people sure are complaining when there’s more important stuff to worry about.

        A lot of folks also can’t help but notice that the bar to entry for complaining about this stuff (or adding codes of conduct, or tweeting for/against something, or complaining about how a BFDL writes emails, or whatever else) is so low as to seemingly specifically invite mobs.

        Projects are groups of people. Like it or not, there’s more to getting groups of people working together than just writing code. How the human side of a project is managed often has much more to do with its success than just about anything else. The programming world is full of people who can write excellent code; people who can manage large numbers of others and keep the project harmoniously moving forward are much rarer.

        Each contributor has a right to discuss how he or she feels about the project and to make suggestions. Those suggestions can be acted upon or not. If someone disagrees, they are free to do so and, if they simply cannot handle the change, they are free to leave and even fork the project.

        This stuff wastes all of our time and tends to push out people that have just quietly been getting shit done–but somehow that never gets covered.

        I always see this argument and yet it never comes to pass. Many projects have recently passed Codes of Conduct and very few major contributors from those projects have left.

        If you feel you can’t work on Python because the terms “master” and “slave” have been deprecated, I have to wonder how motivated you really are, because just about any project in the commercial or open source world involving more than one person is going to occasionally have differences and trifles and misunderstandings and if you can’t handle the occasional one…

        1. 1

          There are starving children in Africa so I shouldn’t mow my lawn.

          Well, yes. Alternately, if you choose to acknowledge that it’s more important to mow your lawn than to help starving children then there is no reason not to apply the same reasoning to ignoring the people complaining about terminology–after all, there are other things to work on.

          The programming world is full of people who can write excellent code; people who can manage large numbers of others and keep the project harmoniously moving forward are much rarer.

          I don’t know what code you’ve been looking at, but I don’t actually think there are that many people that can write excellent code. To your other point, a lot of projects don’t need “large numbers of people”. One person (or just a few people) with clear vision solving a particular task goes a long way.

          If you feel you can’t work on Python because the terms “master” and “slave” have been deprecated, I have to wonder how motivated you really are, because just about any project in the commercial or open source world involving more than one person is going to occasionally have differences and trifles and misunderstandings and if you can’t handle the occasional one…

          You do realize this argument applies in the exact same way for the other side, right?

          ~

          Anyways, I’m happy to continue this over PM/email if you want, so we don’t clutter up here with a long back-and-forth.

    2. 5

      Our code uses this terminology and if I had more time, I’d change it as well. Maybe just server / client?

      1. 3

        If you want to keep all the terminology consistent with other apps, Travis CI seems to call them the “workers” and the “hub”. “Worker” is also used by TaskCluster, but they just call the central job thing “the queue.” Kubernetes calls its nodes the “master” and either “worker” or “minion”, and Docker Swarm has the “manager”, while the rest of them are just called “nodes”.

        “Worker” seems like the standard almost everybody’s arrived at for that part of the architecture, while the name for the lazy bum in the middle is not really standardized. I’d go with “manager” or “hub”, though, if I were you.

        1. 1

          I like the idea of Manager, because that’s what the main program does - manage all the other ones.

        2. 2

          Server/client is already a term of art so that’s a bit loaded. I have always thought leader/follower is the most clear alternative.

        3. 5

          Flagged for basically being content-free.

          1. 2

            Thank you!

            1. 2

              To clarify about “content free” - it’s a link to The Register talking about open source drama that people are likely to have non technical opinions about. I don’t think either of those submission types are very high quality, which is why I flagged it.