On 2020-08-01 21:23, bugzilla-daemon@spamassassin.apache.org wrote:
> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
>
> --- Comment #58 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
> (In reply to John Hardin from comment #57) (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #55)
>
> This isn't a plugin to disable features (i.e. deprecate), it's to enable them.
> So name it "EnableDeprecatedTerminology.pm"
>
> I second the objection to "RaciallyCharged.pm". Doing that is essentially
> scolding anyone who enables backwards compatibility features.
The RaciallyCharged plugin doesn't enabled deprecated terminology, it
enables
the racially charged language. It's used in the rules specifically for
this
issue and the tests as well for backwards compatible. It won't be
suitable as
a generic plugin. The plugin describes exactly what the plugin does and
I
stand by the name. People should stop using the language.
As you cannot fail to be aware if you read even a fraction of the list
messages on this topic, there is absolutely no consensus that
blacklist/whitelist etc. are racially charged terms. Some perceive them
as such, sure, but others disagree, and indeed some disagree rather
strongly. It would seem fitting to avoid a divisive name for re-enabling
the terms.
What is indisputable is that the project has chosen to deprecate the
terms, regardless of the reasons for that deprecation. It is equally
indisputable that the plugin is for backward compatibility reasons. So
how about EnableDeprecatedTerminology or
EnableBackwardCompatibilityTerminology, which would be accurate and far
less divisive names. I suppose it might be argued that another plugin
might be needed in the future for enabling terms deprecated for other
reasons. If that is a worry, then call this one
EnableDeprecatedBlackWhiteTerminology or
EnableBackCompatBlackWhiteTerminology.
--
John
> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
>
> --- Comment #58 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
> (In reply to John Hardin from comment #57) (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #55)
>
> This isn't a plugin to disable features (i.e. deprecate), it's to enable them.
> So name it "EnableDeprecatedTerminology.pm"
>
> I second the objection to "RaciallyCharged.pm". Doing that is essentially
> scolding anyone who enables backwards compatibility features.
The RaciallyCharged plugin doesn't enabled deprecated terminology, it
enables
the racially charged language. It's used in the rules specifically for
this
issue and the tests as well for backwards compatible. It won't be
suitable as
a generic plugin. The plugin describes exactly what the plugin does and
I
stand by the name. People should stop using the language.
As you cannot fail to be aware if you read even a fraction of the list
messages on this topic, there is absolutely no consensus that
blacklist/whitelist etc. are racially charged terms. Some perceive them
as such, sure, but others disagree, and indeed some disagree rather
strongly. It would seem fitting to avoid a divisive name for re-enabling
the terms.
What is indisputable is that the project has chosen to deprecate the
terms, regardless of the reasons for that deprecation. It is equally
indisputable that the plugin is for backward compatibility reasons. So
how about EnableDeprecatedTerminology or
EnableBackwardCompatibilityTerminology, which would be accurate and far
less divisive names. I suppose it might be argued that another plugin
might be needed in the future for enabling terms deprecated for other
reasons. If that is a worry, then call this one
EnableDeprecatedBlackWhiteTerminology or
EnableBackCompatBlackWhiteTerminology.
--
John