From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610731F5AE for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 15:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232670AbhFQP4b (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:56:31 -0400 Received: from vps.thesusis.net ([34.202.238.73]:55546 "EHLO vps.thesusis.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231641AbhFQP42 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:56:28 -0400 Received: by vps.thesusis.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4C95F31924; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:53:49 -0400 (EDT) References: <60c8db3558fb8_1296f208ac@natae.notmuch> <871r93ym8q.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <60ca6586607f5_602720852@natae.notmuch> User-agent: mu4e 1.5.13; emacs 27.1 From: Phillip Susi To: Felipe Contreras Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Derrick Stolee , Jeff King , Bagas Sanjaya , Robert Karszniewicz , Emily Shaffer Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] doc: replace "alice" and "bob" examples Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:48:00 -0400 In-reply-to: <60ca6586607f5_602720852@natae.notmuch> Message-ID: <87pmwkh4he.fsf@vps.thesusis.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Felipe Contreras writes: > I have not read cryptography documentation, so for me Alice and Bob are > simply two illustrative colleagues. I have read cryptography documentation and seen Alice and Bob used commonly. Am I supposed to be confused if I see those names used in documentation for non cryptographic software? If Alice and Bob work there, why should they not be used here? Am I missing something? >> And as argued in 1/6 for those users who /are/ aware of "Alice and Bob" >> it's needless distraction. Maybe it's just me, but whenever I read >> references to them I keep waiting for the cryptography angle to be >> introduced. None of the uses in our documentation reflect that canonical >> usage. > > It's probably not just you, but the vast majority of readers are > likely not aware of any cryptographic reference. I find it surprising that anyone would be upset that the names Alice and Bob were being used in a non cryptographic context. >> There's also just weird things in our documentation fixed by this >> series, such as referring to a random file tracked by git as "bob" >> instead of the more obvious "file.txt". > > OK, _that_ I agree it's unequivocally an improvement. Yea, a file probably shouldn't be called bob... I would probably have gone with "foo.txt" ( but file.txt is just fine too ).