Add check for non-inclusive language

[nhosoi]

Add a check for usage of terms and language that is considered non-inclusive. We are using the woke tool for this with a wordlist that can be found at https://github.com/linux-system-roles/tox-lsr/blob/main/src/tox_lsr/config_files/woke.yml

CHANGELOG.md - cleanup non-inclusive words.

[Jakuje]

Would be great if the action (or at least the commit message or PR description) would have some human-readable description what does the CI action does and why.

[richm]

Suggested change

	# name: woke
	name: woke

[richm]

Would be great if the action (or at least the commit message or PR description) would have some human-readable description what does the CI action does and why.

Sorry - we get so caught up in the tasks that the core team is focused on, we forget that other people might not realize what we're doing.

@nhosoi We should update all of the existing PRs like this:

PR title: Add check for non-inclusive language

PR body: Add a check for usage of terms and language that is considered non-inclusive. We are using the woke tool for this with a wordlist that can be found at https://github.com/linux-system-roles/tox-lsr/blob/main/src/tox_lsr/config_files/woke.yml

in .github/workflows/woke.yml at the top-level it should have
name: Check for non-inclusive language

Then the PR status will look like Check for non-inclusive language / woke (pull_request)

@Jakuje is this sufficient?

[nhosoi]

Thank you for your suggestions, @richm. I think I updated the PR following your advice.

Sorry, @Jakuje, for giving you this surprise... Does this updated PR look better?

[nhosoi]

@richm, I put [WIP] to the PR title because once get-woke/woke#252 (or its alternative) is merged, we may need to add a new option to the action to allow the warning-level words. Do you think it's ok to wait for the woke PR's fate? Or should we handle the woke PR separately?

[Jakuje]

Thanks for the improvements. Looks better. I have only concern about the modification of the changelog how it is done now.

[richm]

Thanks for the improvements. Looks better. I have only concern about the modification of the changelog how it is done now.

Not sure what you mean - what's your concern about the changelog?

[richm]

Thanks for the improvements. Looks better. I have only concern about the modification of the changelog how it is done now.

Not sure what you mean - what's your concern about the changelog?

Is it that the intention of the changelog is that it is readable by end users, and having lines like

- update to tox-lsr 2.4.0 - add support for ansible-test sanity with docker // wokeignore:rule=sanity

is going to be distracting?
We could tell woke to skip CHANGELOG.md completely - but then we run the risk that some sort of non-inclusive language getting into CHANGELOG.md, which would be even worse than having it in other code which isn't usually intended to be read.
We could edit CHANGELOG.md to change or remove those instances of non-inclusive language - this may be the best option.

[Jakuje]

yes, the linter hint might be distracting or confusing to users. I think editing the changelog not to contain potentially non-inclusive language should be preferred way (this is why we do it anyway, aren't we).

[nhosoi]

[citest]

[nhosoi]

[citest bad]

[nhosoi]

@richm, @Jakuje, @spetrosi, could you please review this pr one more time?
(please note that I should not have to run citest since the changes added in this pr do not affect the citests at all... so, please ignore the failures.)
Thanks!

[nhosoi]

Thanks for your approval, @Jakuje! Since I have no privilege to do so, if you could merge this pr, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

[t184256]

Looks fine to me, thanks.