[erlang-questions] Coon - new tool for building Erlang packages, dependency management and deploying Erlang services

[Russell Brown]

Tristan is right. This really is awful. I can’t believe there’s even an argument. If someone emailed me to tell me that my library's name was offensive, I’d apologises and change it. Maybe that’s just me. I think this case is indefensible. And those who ask that we _not talk about it_ but instead talk about the technical merits, no.

If there’s a commercial entity associated with this I hope they act soon.

I need to use erlang for my work, please don’t stick with this name. I don’t want to be in anyway even tangentially associated with it. Does github not have some policy about this repo name, also?

On 12 Feb 2018, at 17:16, Tristan Sloughter <t@REDACTED> wrote:

> This is awful. But sadly not surprising. Intent only matters in the sense the author is not at fault. Intent does not matter when it comes to whether or not you want to not push people away.
> 
> For those who don't care what I or Fred say since we are white, it is easy enough to go ask Black developers in North American. 
> 
> -- 
>  Tristan Sloughter
>  "I am not a crackpot" - Abe Simpson
>  t@REDACTED
> 
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018, at 7:29 AM, zxq9@REDACTED wrote:
>> On 2018年2月12日月曜日 10時16分51秒 JST Fred Hebert wrote:
>>> Intent does not matter.
>> 
>> No.
>> 
>> Fred, I have enormous respect for you and have gone several rounds with 
>> you on several subjects, each time having learned something for my own 
>> part. On technical subjects, anyway.
>> 
>> But... INTENT
>> 
>> You are demonstraby wrong already. Just stop. You will not win against 
>> the weight of history.
>> 
>> This is becoming some SJW ridiculousness already, not because you care 
>> about that but because of the ambient temperature. I know SJW flippancy 
>> is not your intent, but that is the only place this winds up going these 
>> days. That is not a small failure -- it quickly becomes a systemic one, 
>> not just in a concurrent software system of ephemeral importance, but a 
>> concrete socio-economic one of critical importance that pays for all the 
>> other parties we enjoy.
>> 
>> Riddle me this:
>> If we cannot undersand enough about the software systems that WE WRITE 
>> OURSELVES that we need the "let it crash" mentality, how is it that we 
>> somehow understand to a manifest degree the economic and social value 
>> systems (which are profoundly more complex than our petty software 
>> systems) that we can dictate value within them? By what restart 
>> mechanism is this all brought back to a "reasonble default"?
>> 
>> I am sincerely desirous of an answer here, because I have a profound 
>> respect for your intellect but cannot imagine that you have properly 
>> considered the alternatives or where this path of discourse winds up 
>> eventualy going.
>> 
>> -Craig
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions