[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <s5ha702wq9p.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 08:43:14 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: josh@...htriplett.org
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tech-board-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v3] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology
On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:39:49 +0200,
josh@...htriplett.org wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:02:24AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Jul 2020 20:14:27 +0200,
> > Dan Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > +Recommended replacements for 'blacklist/whitelist' are:
> > > + 'denylist / allowlist'
> > > + 'blocklist / passlist'
> >
> > I started looking through the tree now and noticed there are lots of
> > patterns like "whitelisted" or "blacklisted". How can the words fit
> > for those? Actually, there are two cases like:
> >
> > - Foo is blacklisted
> > - Allow to load the non-whitelisted cards
> >
> > Currently I'm replacing the former with "Foo is in denylist", but not
> > sure about the latter case. I thought Kees mentioned about this, but
> > don't remember the proposal...
>
> I find that "blocklist" works well as a verb: "foo is blocklisted",
> "blocklist foo", or in some cases just "block foo" or "deny foo". For
> the second case, phrasings like "allow loading non-safelisted cards" or
> "allow loading cards not on the passlist" seem clear.
Yes, that makes sense. I have wished some simple replacement with
sed, but it seems that it'd be better to rephrase such texts in
anyway.
thanks,
Takashi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists