Great work. Thank you for taking this forward.

 

Ryan van Wyk

VP – Cloud Platforms
m  312.860.0966 | rv6848@att.com

 

 

From: Amy Marrich <amy@demarco.com>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 2020 at 8:27 AM
To: "starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io" <starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>, "airship-discuss@lists.airshipit.org" <airship-discuss@lists.airshipit.org>, "kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io" <kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io>, "zuul-discuss@lists.zuul-ci.org" <zuul-discuss@lists.zuul-ci.org>, openstack-discuss <openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org>, "foundation@lists.openstack.org" <foundation@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [Airship-discuss] Divisive Language stance final(?) draft and Forum session

 

Hi everyone,

 

Below is what we hope is the final draft of the OSF's stance on Divisive Language. If you have any comments please place them on the etherpad[0] and/or join us this Tuesday during the forum[1].

 

Please note that decisions related to what words should be replaced with are being left with the project's technical leadership with the knowledge that context is important to determine the best alternative. That said, the Diversity and Inclusion WG will be available to assist these groups.

 

Thanks,

 

Amy Marrich (spotz)

 

0 - https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/divisivelanguage

1- https://www.openstack.org/summit/2020/summit-schedule/events/24778/divisive-language-and-what-you-should-know

1a - https://zoom.us/j/94295083896?pwd=VmZCTFN3eERDK1ltRHRyWDl0eG1hZz09
1b - https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/vSummit2020__DivisiveLanguage

------------------

The OpenStack Foundation (OSF) Board of Directors supports removal of wording identified as oppressive, racist and sexist by members of our communities from the software and documentation they produce. While we know there will be challenges, both technical and non-technical, this is an action we feel is important.

 

These efforts are the responsibility of the various technical leadership groups within our communities, and we trust them to make appropriate decisions about applicability, timelines, minimizing impact to users and operators, and choosing the changes that make the most sense for their projects.

 

Contributors will take care to make changes to software in the least disruptive way possible. While standardized wording is a laudable goal, we recognize that different implementation contexts might require different solutions. In many cases the work is also complicated by external dependencies for these projects, and their capacity to make necessary changes before we can implement ours.

 

Terminology to which special attention should be paid includes:

  1. The use of "slave," or "master" in reference to slavery-oriented relationships, as is currently found in databases, the domain name system, etc.
  1. The terms "blacklist" and "whitelist" in various contexts (which might  require a variety of different replacements to make sense for those contexts)
  1. The use of "master" in non-slavery-related contexts such as revision control branches and documentation builds (pending feedback from our community members)

We shall continue to be vigilant for other language areas that cause challenges and work with the community to evolve this policy.