[edk2-announce] Inclusive Language RFC


Teng, Lynn L
 

Hello Sean,

You make a good point.

I will remove both steps 3.1 and 4.1 from the plan for now so we can focus on the main proposal.
We can open a discussion later on to determine how best to maintain inclusive language once the codebase has been updated.

Here is the updated proposal:

***

## Overview

To promote a more inclusive and open ecosystem, TianoCore is dedicated to removing archaic terminology that holds negative connotation.
In collaboration with UEFI, we will be following the same [Inclusive Language Implementation Guidelines](https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Inclusive%20Language.pdf) as stated on UEFI.org](https://uefi.org/).


## Plan

1. Announcement of intent, and all check-ins from here onwards will need to abide by Inclusive Language Implementation Guidelines
2. Scrubbing of all comments, documentation, and Wiki pages
3. Scrubbing of all non-legacy code
4. Working with UEFI to scrub legacy code


## Implementation Guidelines

### Master/Slave to not be used together nor alone.
Alternatives:
Master | Slave
-------|-------
Main | Secondary, Subordinate
Primary | Secondary, Replica
Host | Target
Leader | Follower
Orchestrator | Worker
Initiator | Responder

Or similar descriptive terminology

### Blacklist/Whitelist to not be used together nor alone.
Alternatives:
Blacklist | Whitelist
----------|----------
Blocklist | Passlist
Denylist | Allowlist
Refused, Denied | Permitted

Or similar descriptive terminology

-----Original Message-----
From: announce@edk2.groups.io <announce@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Sean
Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 1:16 PM
To: Teng, Lynn L <lynn.l.teng@...>; announce@edk2.groups.io
Subject: Re: [edk2-announce] Inclusive Language RFC

Content looks great except "Plan 4.1."
I don't see a commit hook as a solution that works for this community.
I would think the plan would leverage pr-gate/ci to enforce this?
Otherwise, it is yet another rule and place to cause code-review and contribution friction.

Thanks
Sean




On 10/25/2021 11:57 AM, Teng, Lynn L wrote:
Hello all,

Please provide your feedback and comments to the Inclusive Language Plan below over the next two weeks (10/25-11/05). Thank you in advance for your contributions.


***

## Overview

To promote a more inclusive and open ecosystem, TianoCore is dedicated to removing archaic terminology that holds negative connotation.
In collaboration with UEFI, we will be following the same [Inclusive Language Implementation Guidelines](https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Inclusive%20Language.pdf) as stated on [UEFI.org](https://uefi.org/).


## Plan

1. Announcement of intent, and all check-ins from here onwards will
need to abide by Inclusive Language Implementation Guidelines 2.
Scrubbing of all comments, documentation, and Wiki pages 3. Scrubbing
all non-legacy code 3.1. Integrate open-source commit hook that will
warn submitter of violations 4. Working with UEFI to scrub legacy code
4.1. Update commit hook to block submissions with violations


## Implementation Guidelines

### Master/Slave to not be used together nor alone.
Alternatives:
Master | Slave
-------|-------
Main | Secondary, Subordinate
Primary | Secondary, Replica
Host | Target
Leader | Follower
Orchestrator | Worker
Initiator | Responder

Or similar descriptive terminology

### Blacklist/Whitelist to not be used together nor alone.
Alternatives:
Blacklist | Whitelist
----------|----------
Blocklist | Passlist
Denylist | Allowlist
Refused, Denied | Permitted

Or similar descriptive terminology