*: s/whitelist/allowlist/, s/blacklist/blocklist/

[jordanlewis]

Allow and block aren't hurtful terms, and they also happen to be clearer
than white and black - they connote meaning instantly.

Even though blacklist and whitelist don't have racist intent, they nevertheless
propagate an unconscious "white = allow", "black = deny" meaning. There's no
need to keep these terms - they're just terms. This is just one tiny thing we can
do to improve our industry's inclusivity.

c.f.:

https://twitter.com/bradfitz/status/1269449722063773696?s=20
rails/rails#33677
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/7554
lagom/lagom#2532
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=981129

Release note: None

[cockroach-teamcity]

This change is 

[knz]

Please also add a linter for the future

[jordanlewis]

Adding a reviewer for appdev and sql, since looks like we have approval from kv.

[solongordon]

There are a few instances of "black list" and "white list" as well.

Reviewed 12 of 55 files at r1.
Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @jordanlewis, @rafiss, and @solongordon)

---

pkg/cmd/roachtest/blocklist_test.go, line 31 at r1 (raw file):

func TestBlocklists(t *testing.T) {
	if _, ok := os.LookupEnv(runBlocklistEnv); !ok {
		t.Skipf("Blackist test is only run if %s is set", runBlocklistEnv)

Missed due to misspelling

[rafiss]

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @jordanlewis, @rafiss, and @solongordon)

---

pkg/cmd/roachtest/blocklist_test.go, line 27 at r2 (raw file):

const githubAPITokenEnv = "GITHUB_API_TOKEN"
const runBlocklistEnv = "RUN_BLOCKLIST_TEST"

TBH, "blocklist" is not a very clear term to me, at least for these ORM nightly tests. (I can't speak for every other test in the repo). in fact, i think the only meaning it has to me is because it sounds very similar to "blacklist."

would a term like "expectedFailList" be ok for the ORM tests -- that's exactly what is being tracked in the lists.

[rafiss]

thanks for thinking of this change!

is it missing a "Release note: none" ?

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @jordanlewis and @solongordon)

[solongordon]

Reviewed 17 of 55 files at r1.
Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @jordanlewis, @rafiss, and @solongordon)

---

pkg/cmd/roachtest/blocklist_test.go, line 27 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, rafiss (Rafi Shamim) wrote…

TBH, "blocklist" is not a very clear term to me, at least for these ORM nightly tests. (I can't speak for every other test in the repo). in fact, i think the only meaning it has to me is because it sounds very similar to "blacklist."

would a term like "expectedFailList" be ok for the ORM tests -- that's exactly what is being tracked in the lists.

I'd say this is the perfect opportunity to choose more descriptive names like "expected fail list" on a case-by-case basis. I think "blocklist" is a reasonable starting place though. I agree it's vague but I would say no vaguer than "blacklist."

[rafiss]

that sounds fine. i can change the ORM related tests after this is merged.

Reviewable status: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @jordanlewis, @rafiss, and @solongordon)

[jordanlewis]

Good point, I didn't actually think about all of the cases here, just used search and replace. But you're right that blocklist doesn't really apply here. I also agree that you can do that in another PR - thanks for volunteering @rafiss :)

Raphael, I think a linter is an interesting idea, but we also don't have linters for other phrases we avoid really, so why this one? I'd like to merge without a linter and see what happens. I'll do my part to remind colleagues to avoid blacklist/whitelist when it comes up, and you should too. I think there's a "When in Rome" argument to be made here - when I joined CockroachDB, I named the main TeamCity server the "teamcity leader" because I wanted to fit in with the leader/follower terminology we use here, even though it doesn't ... really make a ton of sense to call the main TeamCity server the leader in the same way a Raft leader is a leader. So, maybe I'm an optimist, but I don't think we need a linter. Can always revisit if it matters!

I fixed the missing cases and added a release note, so going to merge. TFTRs all.

bors r+

[craig]

Build succeeded

• GitHub CI (Cockroach)