Change to racially neutral terminology across library #118
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What? Why?
Terminology within gruf should not be racially insensitive or discriminatory. This moves gruf away from any racially discriminatory language, such as:
blacklistbecomesblocklistmasterwill be changed tomainafter this PR is merged.Note that systems using the blocklist functionality in the RequestLogging interceptor will need to adjust their reference to the parameter. We are preferring to have that be a forced changed rather than provide an upgrade path, to properly remove the biased language from the library in entirety.
How was it tested?
rspec, running e2e tests.
@bigcommerce/platform-engineering @bigcommerce/ruby @bigcommerce/oss-maintainers