You left out "also to make improvements so Buildbot works better in the Amazon EC2 cloud". Do you honestly think that the will spend even a majority, let alone all, of the $15k on a search and replace operation?
Open question: If this is a search & replace operation, why does it need to be mentioned in a $15k grant at all?
To me, this is one of two things. Either Mozilla is saying "We'll give you money, but you gotta get rid of words we don't like", or they're actually spending significant efforts on political correctness.
Both outcomes are frankly disheartening. I will no longer be donating to Mozilla. They're spreading themselves thin as it is, they don't have the resources to throw away money on political pointlessness.
It's a documentation change, but even documentation changes need time and effort to be done properly. That's why this hasn't happened yet - everyone was on board, but no one actually stepped up to do the work, until now.
Not a lot of work - it's not a significant part of the grant to buildbot, and completely insignificant in the big picture of the other grants.
I can understand if you personally don't consider any efforts on such a topic worthwhile, and respect you for your position. But a lot of people do care about it, buildbot has wanted to do it for a while, and it harms no one to finally get this accomplished.
I read that answer, and don't see it point out harm? You do mention some general harm in community friction and worry, and I do agree that is a concern - but that's happening anyhow right now. Yes, it's bad, but removing the word "slave" won't change that.
I do get the worry about overreach. Node.js has a PR that will automate looking for "problematic" words, which starts to sound Orwellian. However, the opposite extreme of "change no words no matter who is offended" can't work either. We need to find a reasonable middle ground.
It seems like removing "slave" is fairly reasonable - that's my feeling. What I find far more unreasonable are drive-by comments that complain without offering to do some work to help. But work to help is exactly what's happening in this (small part of this) story.
I read your answer and I don't think it's compelling.
A better reason is that naming things is hard, and changing master/slave to leader/follower dilutes the accuracy of the metaphor. That's why hard drives and databases, etc use master/slave, and consensus algorithms or self-organizing networks use leader/follower.
After all, if you don't lose meaning from changing the terms, there's nothing to argue aganst from a technical perspective. Then it just becomes your ideologies vs. their's and now people are arguing about politics in pull requests instead of being productive.
I'm too late in this discussion, but they are really going to use the majority of the grant, namely $10k out of the $15k, to replace the word "slave". See
> Buildbot's MOSS application: $10k to remove slave from all code/docs, $5k to work on stability/handling shutting down EC2 slaves when buildbot master crashes/exits/restarts (djmitche, 16:39:19)
