llvm dev - Jun 2020 - Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `job` in source code?

On 25.06.2020 01:19, Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev wrote:
> On 6/21/20 10:41 PM, Ivan Kush via llvm-dev wrote:
>> Yes, broad. But what guys say: "You LLVM developers are all
racists, because you use 'master' word"
>> Or broader: "You  all developers are all racists, because you use
'master' word". We are not racists, but other guys think so.
>> So let's begin consistent and take into account all nations and
languages. Not only Americans.
>> Работа/Job contains a root Раб/Slave.
>> https://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B0
>> If we want completely eradicate a word Slave we should take into
account all nations and languages!
>> You say that removing 'master' you won't mention Slave, but
in Russia leaving a Job could mean Slave
> Being a native Russian and being kinda proud of my feeling of the language,
I find this statement (Job could mean Slave) rather strange...
Are you uninclusive racist or what?
I just don't see the difference between you not seeing negative context of
"Работа" and native English
speakers not seeing negative context of "master".
[ BTW, I feel great pain when you send me to do my work. :-P ]

Of course, as a native Russian speaker you understand sarcastic context here, I
believe.
Does "Master of Science" (Science is enslaved!) is offensive?
"Remastered Edition" (poor edition?)?
Or "Black Hole" (disclaimer: this is astronomical term, not insult)?
If not, why "master branch" is?
Are we going to ban all words having any negative meanings?


```
  If you have a word like “good”, what need is there for a word like “bad”?
“Ungood” will do just as well
```

1984

This argument would probably be better made in the context of removing the
terms blacklist and whitelist from the codebase.  That will be a different
change and a different thread, though.

In the context of this proposal, even if you disagree with renaming the
branch for political reasons it still makes sense purely on the grounds of
consistency with what GitHub is doing.  What *doesnt* make sense is using a
different branch name than what 100% of all GH repos are going to be using
going forward.

You could, of course, also make this particular argument directly to
GitHub, and if they reverse course there’s a chance LLVM would as well.
But given they’ve already publicly announced it, i think they are unlikely
to change their minds.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:46 AM Denis Antrushin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 25.06.2020 01:19, Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev wrote:
> > On 6/21/20 10:41 PM, Ivan Kush via llvm-dev wrote:
> >> Yes, broad. But what guys say: "You LLVM developers are all
racists,
> because you use 'master' word"
> >> Or broader: "You  all developers are all racists, because you
use
> 'master' word". We are not racists, but other guys think so.
> >> So let's begin consistent and take into account all nations
and
> languages. Not only Americans.
> >> Работа/Job contains a root Раб/Slave.
> >>
https://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B0
> >> If we want completely eradicate a word Slave we should take into
> account all nations and languages!
> >> You say that removing 'master' you won't mention
Slave, but in Russia
> leaving a Job could mean Slave
> > Being a native Russian and being kinda proud of my feeling of the
> language, I find this statement (Job could mean Slave) rather strange...
>
> Are you uninclusive racist or what?
> I just don't see the difference between you not seeing negative context
of
> "Работа" and native English
> speakers not seeing negative context of "master".
> [ BTW, I feel great pain when you send me to do my work. :-P ]
>
> Of course, as a native Russian speaker you understand sarcastic context
> here, I believe.
> Does "Master of Science" (Science is enslaved!) is offensive?
"Remastered
> Edition" (poor edition?)?
> Or "Black Hole" (disclaimer: this is astronomical term, not
insult)?
> If not, why "master branch" is?
> Are we going to ban all words having any negative meanings?
>
>
> ```
>   If you have a word like “good”, what need is there for a word like
> “bad”? “Ungood” will do just as well
> ```
>
> 1984
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200625/558b6ca3/attachment.html>

Hi Denis,

On 6/25/20 10:46 AM, Denis Antrushin via llvm-dev wrote:
> Does "Master of Science" (Science is enslaved!) is offensive? 
> "Remastered Edition" (poor edition?)?
"Master" of Science doesn't refer to slavery (as opposed to 
"master/slave"), so likely not.
> Or "Black Hole" (disclaimer: this is astronomical term, not
insult)?
It's not associating black/white with bad/good in that case, so likely not.
> If not, why "master branch" is?
The context here is that "master" is being used to describe a 
subordination relationship ("master/slave"), thus referring directly
to
slavery.
> Are we going to ban all words having any negative meanings?
If computer science had been inclusive from the beginning we wouldn't 
have to question wording, so I guess it's only the fairest thing we can 
do right now.
> ```
>  If you have a word like “good”, what need is there for a word like 
> “bad”? “Ungood” will do just as well
> ```
>
> 1984
The comparison between oppressed people claiming back space in 
high-stakes domains like computer science and an authoritarian regime 
that enforces a new language just to suppress revolutionary ideas is 
irrelevant. People are protesting around the world because they've been 
living under constant monitoring and oppression by representatives of 
states that are authoritarian towards them (e.g. systematically 
unpunished murders from police officers, unlawful arrests, severe 
judgements, etc.).This is what leads us to question vocabulary that 
directly refers to the roots of that discriminatory violence.

Regards,
Jules

On 25/06/2020 11:14, Jules Penuchot via llvm-dev wrote:
> The comparison between oppressed people claiming back space in 
> high-stakes domains like computer science and an authoritarian regime 
> that enforces a new language just to suppress revolutionary ideas is 
> irrelevant.
To the best of my knowledge, NO oppressed people care about the language.
> People are protesting around the world because they've been 
> living under constant monitoring and oppression by representatives of 
> states that are authoritarian towards them (e.g. systematically 
> unpunished murders from police officers, unlawful arrests, severe 
> judgements, etc.).
Then we should do something about that oppression. I think the real 
problem here is that America claims to be "The Land of the Free" - 
what's that on the Statue of Liberty about "Send us your
oppressed" etc
etc, but Blacks feel oppressed in their own land.
> This is what leads us to question vocabulary that 
> directly refers to the roots of that discriminatory violence.
And in the conteXt of this sentence, "us" means "The White
Morally
Superior Brigade". And my eXperience of this in Britain is that Blacks 
etc object strongly - "stop making things worse!".

Unfortunately, America is by far the worst offender in this regard of 
actual abuse. If we can fiX America, maybe we can fiX other countries, 
but in Britain I'd say it's not intentional, and it's down to
ignorance.

We have something called "Stop and Search", which Black people hate. 
Let's say the Police stop 100 people, and find 8 black people with 
knives, and four whites. We had a Chief Police Officer make a similar (I 
can't remember it eXactly) argument on national TV. EXcept there's a 
*crucial* piece of information missing. That 100 includes 80 blacks. NOW 
do the maths ... That's just ignorant prejudice, not malicious.

Cheers,
Wol

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 11:14, Jules Penuchot via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > If not, why "master branch" is?
> The context here is that "master" is being used to describe a
> subordination relationship ("master/slave"), thus referring
directly to
> slavery.
I don't think this is universally accepted. Assuming so causes more
grief than is necessary.

Just to be clear, I personally don't think my own experiences speak
for anyone else, so I'm not saying we shouldn't change the branch
name. I really don't mind whatever is called, and if that helps some
people, my "effort" is zero for overall net benefit.

But the fact that "master" in git branch is directly related to
slavery is a stretch.

I have never associated other branches as "slave" to the master
branch. I know a lot of people that didn't either. Some people replied
to that effect on this list. I believe that this is why some people
are calling this process "american centric", because this word is
clearly more sensitive in the US than other places of the word. For
context, in Brazil, the "slave owner" was called something closer to
"landlord". I had trouble adapting to England, having to rent from a
"landlord". But I got used to it and don't think it is offensive
as
the context is different.

On the list of words compiled by Google shared in one of these threads
has the word "master" simply as "Don't use. See slave".
This is an
over-simplification of a word that has many meanings, like the ones
discussed in the various threads here. I believe the reductionism in
semantics here (and in Google's list) is because, particularly in the
US, the "slave" meaning of the word is so strong and brings so many
bad memories, that any other meaning ceased to exist or be relevant.

Master/Mister, Master of Science, Kung-fu Master are all positive
meanings of the word. In computer science specifically, "master/slave"
is used for databases or distributed services, and that may be where
this is coming from. But that is not to say that this is the only
meaning of the word in computer science as a whole.

So, let's call it for what it is, because I don't think we need
"stronger" reasons to change the branch name.

1. There are a lot of people nowadays, particularly in the US, who are
very sensitive to that word in particular, due to its history with
slavery in English speaking countries.
2. There are a lot of developers in those countries that want to /
participate in the LLVM community.
3. Git branches can be called whatever we want, including the main
development branch.
4. Github doesn't care either and has a setting to change the name to
whatever we want.
5. Changing the name is reasonably painless, after we all had the
chance to change our infrastructure.
6. The continuous long term cost of the change is literally zero.

In this particular case, to me at least, the cost/benefit is almost
100%. Let's get organised and do this together, waiting for the right
moment, which will be decided by consensus in the community, not push
back from those who want it to happen soon. I think the vast majority
of people here want to do it and will help do it. Let's assume the
best in people and give them time to solve their own internal issues
first.

But let's not assume that what is "widely accepted" in one part of
the
world is actually "widely accepted" worldwide.

cheers,
--renato