[PATCH v2 00/13] Replace us of term abort

[Thomas Monjalon]

18/08/2023 19:45, Stephen Hemminger:
> The term 'abort' is on the inclusive namin Tier 1 word list
> as replace when possible. It is possible to do this across
> DPDK except the few places that directly call the lib C abort()
> function.
> 
> v2 - drop changes to sfc since requires changes to base driver
>    - cleanup some checkpatch and missing spots
> 
> Rationale (from https://inclusivenaming.org/word-lists/tier-1/abort/)
> 
>     The term “abort” frequently appeared in Inclusive Language
>     Initiative surveys and standards reviews. Multiple organizations felt
>     that usage of the word posed an issue worth addressing in their
>     individual companies and projects. Given this widespread interest, the
>     INI has decided to offer its own guidance.
> 
>     INI recommends replacing “abort” wherever possible. In accordance with
>     the INI’s language framework, the term does not necessarily constitute
>     a first-order concern. However, because it is such a charged term
>     outside of computing, “abort” fails to provide a clear description of
>     the action being taken, and serves primarily to distract. There are
>     numerous other words in the English language that can serve the same
>     purpose in computing without invoking the emotionally charged cultural
>     context of “abort.”
> 
>     Although the INI debated whether the word “abort” itself or the
>     procedure commonly associated with it (“abortion”) caused the
>     aforementioned distractions, the etymology of the word has a direct
>     and unambiguous link to the termination of a pregnancy. Alternative
>     uses of the word “abort” are in use today, such as in
>     rocketry. However, the INI concluded that the term itself was
>     insufficiently distanced from its original meaning for those
>     alternative definitions to be its primary association.
> 
>     All this being said, the INI does not advocate for a blanket
>     replacement of the term. “Abort” appears in many standards
>     organization documents, and is deeply embedded in some operating
>     systems. As such, the INI acknowledges that the term may need to
>     be retained in certain contexts to remain in compliance with those
>     standards, or to preserve accurate documentation for bedrock
>     functions and processes that are too fundamental to be changed.
> 
>     Some organizations have noted that using “abort” in contexts other
>     than the medical or political serves to de-stigmatize the term,
>     thereby promoting reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. Conversely,
>     discouraging the term could be interpreted as accepting a framing that
>     denies a pregnant person’s right to control their body. The judgment
>     of the INI is that the term causes discomfort or offense without
>     providing a necessary degree of technical clarity, and therefore it
>     should be avoided. At some future point, because language changes over
>     time, “abort” may become a less contentious term; at that juncture,
>     the appropriateness of the term may be revisited.

I don't feel the rationale should be followed here.
If there are better terms, why not.
But really, "abort" is not only medical.
And banning this word may be felt as a political position,
which is not what we want.

I am OK to replace if there is a better word in some contexts,
but we should not make it forbidden.