Re: Renaming the FTP Masters
> While I also agree with Paul that the current name is somewhat dated
> technologically, it is not fatally flawed. Therefore, I think we
> should leave the naming decision to the FTP masters themselves.
This doesn't change anything about this thread or this email, but in the spirit
of trying to be really clear, I believe master is a harmful word as well,
even if it's used in a sense where the implication is not slavery -- since it
still causes harm to our friends working alongside us to create an
operating system. I've done the best I can to fix it where I see it but
still live with legacy usage.
My position is that there is no part of the name "ftp master" that I find
particularly relevant anymore.
Part two of my position is that Debian is a very risk averse and slow to
change project. It takes us eons to do anything major, and if that
decision is perceived as controversial in any way, it takes an order
of magnitude longer. With a lot of hostility and the same conversations
but with a different flavor of the year. At this point I could script half the
traffic on -vote and -project.
A GR will serve to turn something that can be done by under 10 people
into a series of tragic and passive aggressive blog posts around the
etymology of words. To be honest, I have better ways to spend my
time.
It strikes me as possible and likely the ftpteam agrees that the name
is outmoded (both for "ftp" and "master") and can make the change
internally (if I had my way, "debian archive team"), or internally with
the DPL if that's something that needs to be done. Doing a GR is
a signal of failure to let those doing the work make their own
decision on their responsibilities, in my mind.
The hardest part may very well be changing all the CNAME/A
records[1][2]
Fondly,
paultag
[1]: this is actually going to be hard :)
[2]: I may live to regret these words
Reply to: