Re: Proposal: Replace all references to master/slave in GNOME modules

On Wed, 2019-05-01 at 21:58 +1000, Michael Gratton wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 21:52, Michael Gratton <mike vee net> wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 12:48, Richard Hughes <hughsient gmail com> 
On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 12:38, Michael Gratton <mike vee net> wrote:
 They have also been successful in getting other projects to use 
 inclusive language. For example, MongoDB initially refused to stop
 using the term "master", but then relented after Python did so.

That's misrepresenting it *AGAIN*. Both stopped using master along
with slave. The main developer branch is still called master in both

In any case, if you would care to actually read the diffs on the Python 
change, you'll see that it covered a number of instances of using 
another word for "master" when "slave" wasn't involved. It's not the 
pair of terms that is problematic, it's either term in isolation that 

Further, this proposal is actually covers changing fewer terms than 
Python did, and hence is more conservative in that respect.

Please, actually read it: <>

It looks to me like all replaced references are references which
contain process relationships; in most cases the managed process was
called a "slave", but there were various exception in which the term
"master" was still changed. But this is already very sensible simply
for consistency reasons.

A number of comments–including ones by the original reporter–actually
deem the term "master" to be unproblematic in other contexts and even
mentioning the specific case of git. See
I did not find a comment in the mentioned issue that argues that the
git branch name is problematic.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]