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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 470B11F466 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 19:53:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727165AbgBETx1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Feb 2020 14:53:27 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:41052 "EHLO mail-pl1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727085AbgBETx1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Feb 2020 14:53:27 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id t14so1308245plr.8 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 11:53:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kYTZNbZG98PwUqaTOcvocibJzOJwxLEg10ab+EUQTzQ=; b=NofspIt8AjpWxwmLie42HaEpO9XuMn8n8Vm82ruk5+aONlZeHmxmtff9C3Dbp7syj4 Aa9CMSUB4565FBvcexN1hweS1QYJhkto6YDOe3rQv6pkOB3/h3rBGUmSc/k7xjRI6Lo2 aop3fhv8gj10y4FTC0v2fU2ZsJ0TUWrXT2u1864Yk9y0uTDpLXtWm71H1VvBEwvCpKGA RbU72h3XWziJIGA0gLIzV7GCDzejhHp6KlUmWjDAmOthZ/u+bVSHr96Nuf3Dp8vDQNJl 6GD/DkYog2t/ni0USf+M2hIuuKSRDblqgC3jRxD/jpuQVuKMWPfsv9shet4LDWNBoivz RTFQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kYTZNbZG98PwUqaTOcvocibJzOJwxLEg10ab+EUQTzQ=; b=DgwAA74m5qk9884/8Mnu8CLjNKb19UzKiopG9GdLuAaLwotbTjR1NkpOFm5znHap40 pRdMSopUkQg7Sw6mA56Gdgmashfl+DuZVLiSb6BqvCZfCdObuqOAjgxuqUcFKH1KX7kt hfonb1m2n/9smq5VM+fHLP9T+d9TLxpgM6xn0rNXIiLWSWrmFjEy2wE7+55Y65+Rjq1f pazkrxizkMhUQ2tYEHZR1CFKxcEVHuWff384soQhDqRxgX5pow7grYg78zEwGhyI0qng 7lrkMYuJq2EalgBFbZt3Ff0wANcKk3bkEUb18ZqRQXkuoEKY/JtHFiAkyctJisYKV8yg ZHVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUbY2K2eM3V4TlZdhULlx363Djh++tWSvibMXYT8Lhwaa4+AirG t0767hkP0LPzlMjrfR6VVfy2UaN/Vc3nGTJyd2s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxRSTBQyqE0NUPItRRelnMtbDcI6jh1ZxZQnJBzXQMWwoqTV0ai9hH75taGor29n+wfaZjftKr4A3X4p/JeAvI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8341:: with SMTP id z1mr35709155pln.178.1580932406672; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 11:53:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200124033436.81097-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20200124033436.81097-10-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20200205004455.GI87163@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20200205004455.GI87163@google.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_=C3=85gren?= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 20:53:15 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/15] bugreport: generate config safelist based on docs To: Emily Shaffer Cc: Git Mailing List , Johannes Schindelin Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 01:45, Emily Shaffer wrote: > > > I sort of wonder whether safelist/blocklist is to prefer over > > whitelist/blacklist, or if it's the other way round. The former are new > > to me, whereas the latter are the terms I would have used. But that's > > just me, of course. I was a little surprised, that's all. > > Eh. I think the following things are true: > > - Whitelist/blacklist has a "smell" of discrimination, whether that's > the true etymology or not. > - Those with experience in the field can easily understand what > whitelist or blacklist means. > - Safelist/blocklist do not "smell" the same way. > - It is easy to tell what "safelist" means: "a list of stuff which is > safe." No experience needed. > > So, while it's new, I think it's not harmful. I see only a no-op or > positive impact from using this term instead of whitelist/blacklist. > Computer science seems to have quite a few terms which fall into this > long-standing but potentially negative area, so I don't mind looking for > alternatives where it's harmless to do so. Ok, that all makes sense. Thanks Martin