They pronounce it correctly and its pronounciation is the same as "cock" (or close enough for people to understand it so). And that's the problem.
Edit: Literally the first two sentences:
> The name Coq comes from the French word for rooster, CoC (the Calculus of Constructions) and Thierry Coquand, one of the initial authors of Coq. But it is also close to the word "cock" which has a slang meaning that some English speakers consider offensive (it also means a male bird or the firing lever in a gun).
The correct pronunciation is closer to 'coke', as noted in the article.
EDIT: the article is somewhat ambiguous on the subject, and I guess it's a bit subjective, but to me 'coke' sounds much closer to the French than the American 'cahck' at least.
I'm surprised as well, I would've intuitively leaned towards pronouncing it more like "cog" than "cock". Like in Coq au Vin, but I guess that cannot be ordered in the US, gotta go for rooster in wine (or freedom rooster?) to make sure nobody gets upset when their mind's first interpretation of a sound is "penis".
Even assuming you mean “like that is pronounced in English”, its worth noting that there are at least three different first (or only, as some don’t provide more than one) pronunciations of the “Coq” in “Coq au Vin” in thr half-dozen English dictionaries I’ve just checked.)
Thanks, I wasn't aware that they're slaughtering not only the bird but also the pronunciation! Is it one of those things where not being exposed to French at all makes one unable to produce both a hard k-sound as in "ck" and a softer k-sound that is somewhere between g and k, but definitely closer to "cog" than to "cock"?
> Is it one of those things where not being exposed to French at all makes one unable to produce both a hard k-sound as in "ck" and a softer k-sound that is somewhere between g and k, but definitely closer to "cog" than to "cock"?
No, its the fact that the vowel sound in “coq” does not usually occur in English, and is about equidistant from the ones in coke and cock, which are the more common in English; different English dictionaries give each of the three primary status. I can’t find any source with any variation in the final consonant sound, giving it consistently as voiceless (IPA “k”, like “cock”) not voiced (IPA “g”, like “cog”), both in English and French.
In English the "o" from "coke" sounds more like the way the letter "o" is pronounced in the alphabet, which is slightly different from the "o" in "cock".
The "o" in "coke" is what linguists call a diphthong: two vowel sounds pronounced in quick succession. Pronounce it slowly and notice how your tongue moves as you say it. In IPA it's written /oʊ/, it's a combination of the vowels /o/ and /ʊ/. The "o" in "cock" is a single vowel that's pronounced quite differently in British vs. American English.
The French "o" isn't like any of these; I believe in the case of "coq" it's pronounced /o/, i.e. the first half of the English /oʊ/. Your tongue shouldn't move while you say it. Pronouncing this single vowel like the English /oʊ/ is a very common mistake that English speakers make in French (or Spanish, Portuguese etc.) - it's a distinctively English sound that gives you away as a native English speaker.
Just curious, did you learn the IPA in school? I always find it surprising how familiar people online seem to be with the system, I personally have no idea how to read those notations.
Edit: I found out there is a chart with sound on the IPA website[0]!
I don't think it's that ambiguous, at least not in French. Even if you are more familiar with a local variation of the language or have an accent (that's my case, my native language is technically Swiss-French, and we have strong local accents) you are still aware of the "standard French" pronunciation.
I face this with German too, people might speak a dialect or have a local accent but are also familiar with Hochdeutsch.
English doesn't have a standard body as far as I know, and pronunciation vary a lot between different countries, so that may be different.
It'd be wherever it wouldn't be a dialect, which to my mind is obviously british english. Other variations are regional dialects born of distance and time.
Every variety of a language is a dialect; what OP means is that there is no governing body determining what constitutes "standard" English, like the Académie française. Rather, there is an informal standard used by the media and elites in every English-speaking country, making it a pluricentric language[0].
> you are still aware of the "standard French" pronunciation.
Not that well, at least for me, I think I know most cases where it changes from my local accent, but I would struggle to emit the "correct" sound. It wasn't that long ago that I learnt that "é, ais, er, et, ez" were not supposed to be pronounced the same, and I cannot tell how each one is supposed to be pronounced. I would say people from Switzerland are probably more aware of the difference, because it is acknowledged that it is slightly different, whereas I have never heard anyone tell me that I wasn't learning "proper/standard" French and that it's "supposed" to be pronounced differently.
You make a very good point, I never thought about this.
Btw, I was 16 when I learned that "un" (like in the number 1), "en", and "an" have different pronunciations and that I pronounced them incorrectly my entire life! I still have to force myself from time to time to make a clear distinction.
What do you mean? Nearly every native English speaker who works with Coq pronounces it "cock" (from experience at POPL, PLDI, and other PL conferences).
Personally, I'm very happy that they are changing the name.
Women weren't turned away, they did the turning away. I don't see what was misrepresented. The person you're chastising seems to have edited the quote to ensure we know they're replying to one specific part of it. After all, if they had left the part about women turning away, it might seem like they were asking "what's wrong" with the women.
That's certainly a reasonable understanding, though I can't imagine there not being any men who've been harassed too (even by simple mockery), which is why I read it as if there were women who did not even use it because of the name, and a separate group of others (which includes women too) who still used it, but were being harassed (eg. when they spoke about it).
I think that makes a big difference in the interpretation, not that it should make a big difference in action taken.
I did consider an option of it being a joke, but thenthe discussion continues as if it was a real quote, so it's still worth correcting for the benefit of those who are now arguing the quote instead of the article.
"Getting harassed" has lost all its meaning in online conversations. If a 16 year old giggles when hearing the word the first time, that's "harassment" and s/he is a sexist pig who should be deported to the nearest Gulag.
I'm very curious about the form of this harassment. It's hard to imagine. Maybe if you had extremely immature colleagues, but even then, "harassed"?
- Hey, what are you up to?
- Working in Coq
- Hu-hu you said "cock"
Presumably any adult would be aware that the name is "funny" and would be careful when replying and say something like "working on formal proofs", "programming" or "maths" instead.
I know you argue in bad faith, but that issue has indeed been addressed since at least 2012 and the general consensus is, that the name is not a problem.
In terms of Coq, it's the developers addressing the issue, not even a third person. That in itself should be enough to not dismiss it outright.
That's unsubstantiated, as we have at least second-hand evidence of people getting harassed over using the name Coq, while we don't have evidence for something similar for git.
And if you were really affected by the word git, you would understand the issue of the Coq developers. Since you feigned ignorance in your first response, we can conclude, you're just arguing in bad faith.
You should really start to regard other people's feelings as something not necessary to be hurt, if it could easily be avoided.
In French SQL is generally spelled out loud without it being an issue. I don't really see why that wouldn't work for coq, though I understand if they prefer to have an actual word, "see-oh-queue" is a bit ugly.
HPE found themselves in a similar position several years back with their ProLiant line of x86 servers. Each "generation" of those systems used to be referred to as "g4" or "g5", then "g6", etc.
When time came for the 8th generation systems, all the nomenclature suddenly shifted to "gen8" instead of "g8" without much explanation offered.
Come to find out, "g8" is offensive slang for "cock" in Chinese. China being a huge market, HPE thought it better to change the entire naming scheme of their server line rather than deal with any potential blowback from naming their systems "g8".
> Why not just pronounce it differently in English
I think because most people won't. They'll go for the most obvious pronunciation. Especially as there's a brand called Le Coq Sportif, which has a pretty well known pronunciation.
First exposure to names of languages, libraries, etc. is often written on a screen - and so it could well be years before anyone actually speaks the word, but they have the pronunciation in their head, and that tends to stick.
I can think of at least one incidence where chicken would be. I imagine there are similar edge cases for rooster. It's because it refers circumspectly to the original word I'd guess.
<tongue-in-cheek>In a parallel effort, the airline industry is modifying its manuals and training to not refer to the pilot bay as "cockpit".</tongue-in-cheek>
They should keep it instead of trying to avoid offending people. People take things too seriously. When else are you going to have fun saying, I'm working on the CoQ have an awkward stare, and then laugh about it?
We already have CoC for Vim, and I see no problem with that.
I think it's perfectly fine for a project to have a discussion about what they are calling themselves and what the consequences of that are. I really like the introduction of the linked wiki and I think it leaves it open to anyone to argue their point, from "leave it, it's funny" to "I feel offended and so should you".
I don't think this discussion has reached the point (yet) where it's simply about avoiding offence or getting bullied into a decision.
Depends on your viewpoint. If you have a small plugin or personal project like CoC, without any ambitions to reach many people, such a joke is fine in my book. But in this case, it seems to hinder the adoption and growth of the language, so it makes a lot of sense to switch to a less offensive name. Especially since the language seems to aim to get more widespread usage.
I think this is laudable. I don't use the language, but I always found its obvious pronunciation a bit strong. I've had discussions of theorem provers with engineers I know, and when Coq is mentioned it always ends up with either some awkward silence or sniggers (US: snickers) - which is pathetic, but it's also real.
As a man, I hadn't thought of the potential problems for women in this sphere (quelle surprise); that is absolutely the strongest argument for change. We should all strive to be inclusive and it seems the leaders in the Coq community are taking that seriously, and should be applauded.
My two penneth worth on the variants that still include Coq in the name (like 'Le Coq', etc.) is that it'll just get shortened down to Coq in real-world use. English tends to shorten terms to the minimum word or phrase that still conveys meaning.
> Languages tend to shorten terms to the minimum word or phrase that still conveys meaning.
FTFY
It's just particularly noticable with English because the more people speak a language, the more people work on trimming out the fat (consciously or unconsciously).
> As a man, I hadn't thought of the potential problems for women in this sphere (quelle surprise); that is absolutely the strongest argument for change.
Because women are more prudish than men? Or because the joke is about the male member? So if it was called "Qunt", it would be men that were clamouring for a name change?
Clamouring? No, can't say I would. But it would be an awkward name and I'd be glad when it was changed. Certainly would be uncomfortable talking about it at work.
Not the OP, and not a point I'd necessarily push strongly (I think it's an awkward name for everyone), but the fact that women are already often hypersexualized or treated as sexual objects in our society could certainly make it worse for women.
You don't see how women, knowing full well that some men are already looking at them as sex objects might be uncomfortable saying the names of sexual organs around those same men? More uncomfortable than a man who knows (or at least believes) those men aren't thinking about him that way?
The article even says women have been harassed speaking about it.
Look I already said I think it's an awkward name for men and women, but this feels like a failure of imagination to me.
If there are people in the community purposely ignorant of the French entomology and using the similarity to "cock" to troll or harass others does the project changing it's name even help? Those people are still present. Perhaps cutting off such an avenue does reduce toxicity but it feels like catering to the lowest common denominator. Is it too much to expect basic decency these days?
Not to mention the English normative focus. Have there been other large projects that felt the need to change their name because of connotations in languages other than English?
> What's with this weird trend since 2016'ish (?) that everyone is getting offended by everything? Surely the world has enough other problems right now
The only thing new is the degree of performative offense by reactionary elites at people “getting offended” as a response to every complaint of substantive patterns of harm (not mere offense) as a distraction from actual problems.
This isn't new. Brands frequently have different names in different countries due to connotations. Characters in books and films get renamed when they cross borders. Cloact was renamed to Reagent due to people associating it with cloaca. I seem to remember another project that was renamed due to it's connotations in Spanish but I can't find it now.
While it was never renamed, GIMPs name has drawn objectors since well before 2016.
The only reason this is a big deal instead of routine like those is the current backlash against "PC culture" or "SJW"s.
I don't think the Coq developers are inclined to chicken out, and the virility of a theorem prover shouldn't be underestimated. More concretely, there would be some confusion with the popular Chicken Scheme compiler.
If there was a project called "fuq", and people were being harassed or finding it difficult to discuss, I think anyone could understand that this was an issue.
Given this, "Coq" is clearly a fuqing problematic name, and unless it's absolutely intended to have the double meaning, it should probably be changed somehow.
A clear alternate pronounciation of "coke" (with optional circumflex), would seem easiest to implement. At least, try it for a while and see if it works?
i) If people is being harassed because of the name of their workplace, then the problem is the harasser. Changing the name of the workplace is a bit like victim shaming, in the sense that the real problem is the harasser.
ii) If people have difficulties talking about their workplace name, then I think it's people's problem.
> Changing the name of the workplace is a bit like victim shaming, in the sense that the real problem is the harasser.
Yes, but the connotation is arguably quite NSFW. If it would be named penis directly, it should not make a difference either, but it does. Throwing in "we should use cock!" in a meeting will get you glances at first and surely some more afterwards, even if you clarify.
Ask the companies named ISIS (there are quite a few) how the name worked out for them; same thing here.
> If people have difficulties talking about their workplace name, then I think it's people's problem.
Yes, but it is then, in turn, your problem, as you loose out on quite a few people - either because they don't want the trouble with the name or because it simply deters them. Marketing is extremely important.
So you'd be happy announcing to a room of strangers that you're working for a company called "fuq"? Or "diqhed"? Or how about "faqqot"? And how it plays out every single time?
In all things, there are limits - and "coq", as it is presently pronounced, is obviously breaching those limits, or the problem wouldn't be there.
> A clear alternate pronounciation of "coke" (with optional circumflex), would seem easiest to implement
Yes, but I'm not convinced this would actually take hold. The Voltswagen thread had a lot of discussion about this and quite a few were convinced that the "american" pronunciation is as valid as the canonical German one. So, in the end, it would probably remain "cock" for a lot of people.
> At least, try it for a while and see if it works?
A name change, even if only in pronunciation, is a rather large and conflicting change. Doing this twice looks like a recipe for disaster.
I'm not sure a name change merely in pronunciation must be necessarily large or conflicting, especially if the existing one has an obvious problem. It's essentially a "soft" change - ie, change nothing, don't even announce it publicly. Quietly put "pronounced as: " in the docs and instruct employees to start saying it differently. Not a big deal.
If after a while that resolves the problem or at least sufficiently minimises it, you're done.
If not, I think you have a clear go-ahead to make a big, breaking change.
I'm no French nor English native speaker (I speak a bit of both, though) and don't understand that discussion for a name change.
This reminds me of the issue with the word "negro" (Spanish for black) in some schools of the USA. It seems some people couldn't understand that that word was there for centuries before the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Are we going to adapt every language to avoid negative connotations in English (or the common tongue of our era)? If you are an English speaker you should be used to pronounciation exceptions, being an almost no-rule pronunciation language. Pronounce it like you want ("coqi", "le coq" or whatever you want) but changing the name for all speakers (even the non-English ones)? That's a big no-no for me.
You will never understand these discussions if you take them at face value. There is almost always something else involved. Misdirection away from actual issues, people with too much time on their hands, people with an axe to grind or some other agenda.
in Denmark the word pik has the same meaning, so when I was working in a ruby shop almost 10 years ago would have to listen to two senior developers making pik jokes every now and then. They weren't really very funny, but I guess they were amused.
Why is it our problem that Americans sexualize any animal in sight? "cock" means "male bird" in British English.
Perhaps Americans should just stop using Coq; anything of value in that area is developed in Europe anyway. When the product is finished, Americans try to govern or market it.
Remember when “Fedora × Raspberry Pi” was blessed “Pidora”, to much amusement of their Russian-speaking userbase? There were also calls for renaming, but apparently they kept the name.
Everybody will read it as «пидора» which is highly obscene swearword for [a certain F word HN doesn't allow to utter]. You can't even write that with a straight face, let alone speak it out loud, definitely banned for use in mass-media in transliterated/vocal form. But not many on the internet were offended by the name or anything. Quite the contrary, people thought it's a funny name and makes good marketing.
I’m sure there are plenty of things that are fine in English that sound mildly (or worse) offensive in other languages. Should we really be imposing on other people?
A project I was involved with (Reagent) changed it's name from Cloact because it made people think of cloaca. Companies very commonly change brand and product names when selling in different countries due to connotations arising from the name in the native tongue. Similarly books and movies will rename characters for the same purpose.
I guess the question is, why shouldn't the Coq project think about this kind of thing?
136 comments
[ 169 ms ] story [ 4081 ms ] threadWhat's wrong with people?
Edit: Literally the first two sentences:
> The name Coq comes from the French word for rooster, CoC (the Calculus of Constructions) and Thierry Coquand, one of the initial authors of Coq. But it is also close to the word "cock" which has a slang meaning that some English speakers consider offensive (it also means a male bird or the firing lever in a gun).
EDIT: the article is somewhat ambiguous on the subject, and I guess it's a bit subjective, but to me 'coke' sounds much closer to the French than the American 'cahck' at least.
Are people getting upset when they say "cogwheel" or "a small cog in a big wheel"?
Even assuming you mean “like that is pronounced in English”, its worth noting that there are at least three different first (or only, as some don’t provide more than one) pronunciations of the “Coq” in “Coq au Vin” in thr half-dozen English dictionaries I’ve just checked.)
No, its the fact that the vowel sound in “coq” does not usually occur in English, and is about equidistant from the ones in coke and cock, which are the more common in English; different English dictionaries give each of the three primary status. I can’t find any source with any variation in the final consonant sound, giving it consistently as voiceless (IPA “k”, like “cock”) not voiced (IPA “g”, like “cog”), both in English and French.
- in French, word coq
- in English, word cock
In English the "o" from "coke" sounds more like the way the letter "o" is pronounced in the alphabet, which is slightly different from the "o" in "cock".
The French "o" isn't like any of these; I believe in the case of "coq" it's pronounced /o/, i.e. the first half of the English /oʊ/. Your tongue shouldn't move while you say it. Pronouncing this single vowel like the English /oʊ/ is a very common mistake that English speakers make in French (or Spanish, Portuguese etc.) - it's a distinctively English sound that gives you away as a native English speaker.
Edit: I found out there is a chart with sound on the IPA website[0]!
[0]: https://www.internationalphoneticalphabet.org/ipa-sounds/ipa...
The sources I find mostly say /ɔ/, which is one step more open than /o/
I face this with German too, people might speak a dialect or have a local accent but are also familiar with Hochdeutsch.
English doesn't have a standard body as far as I know, and pronunciation vary a lot between different countries, so that may be different.
It'd be wherever it wouldn't be a dialect, which to my mind is obviously british english. Other variations are regional dialects born of distance and time.
[0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluricentric_language
Not that well, at least for me, I think I know most cases where it changes from my local accent, but I would struggle to emit the "correct" sound. It wasn't that long ago that I learnt that "é, ais, er, et, ez" were not supposed to be pronounced the same, and I cannot tell how each one is supposed to be pronounced. I would say people from Switzerland are probably more aware of the difference, because it is acknowledged that it is slightly different, whereas I have never heard anyone tell me that I wasn't learning "proper/standard" French and that it's "supposed" to be pronounced differently.
Btw, I was 16 when I learned that "un" (like in the number 1), "en", and "an" have different pronunciations and that I pronounced them incorrectly my entire life! I still have to force myself from time to time to make a clear distinction.
Personally, I'm very happy that they are changing the name.
Full quote which you managed to misrepresent by "helpfully" cutting text out.
So, women were turned away, and others were harassed.
So I guess that's exactly what's wrong with people: they will frequently misunderstand things and then spread those misunderstandings.
I think that makes a big difference in the interpretation, not that it should make a big difference in action taken.
- Hey, what are you up to?
- Working in Coq
- Hu-hu you said "cock"
Presumably any adult would be aware that the name is "funny" and would be careful when replying and say something like "working on formal proofs", "programming" or "maths" instead.
In terms of Coq, it's the developers addressing the issue, not even a third person. That in itself should be enough to not dismiss it outright.
And if you were really affected by the word git, you would understand the issue of the Coq developers. Since you feigned ignorance in your first response, we can conclude, you're just arguing in bad faith.
You should really start to regard other people's feelings as something not necessary to be hurt, if it could easily be avoided.
For those who are wondering, 'Q' in French is pronounced the same as the word 'cul,' meaning 'ass.'
My favorite proposal is Le Coq Formel even if it’s a bit long. The simple Le Coq feels too meme-y.
When time came for the 8th generation systems, all the nomenclature suddenly shifted to "gen8" instead of "g8" without much explanation offered.
Come to find out, "g8" is offensive slang for "cock" in Chinese. China being a huge market, HPE thought it better to change the entire naming scheme of their server line rather than deal with any potential blowback from naming their systems "g8".
Java is already pronounced "djava" in English, and "yava"/"iava" in several other European languages.
I assume the same for C++, C#, Awk, Python etc.
I mean I'm glad I don't have to speak "Cee-plus-plus" out loud much.
I think because most people won't. They'll go for the most obvious pronunciation. Especially as there's a brand called Le Coq Sportif, which has a pretty well known pronunciation.
First exposure to names of languages, libraries, etc. is often written on a screen - and so it could well be years before anyone actually speaks the word, but they have the pronunciation in their head, and that tends to stick.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26738980
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26747129
What dialect has "rooster" as slang for penis?
We already have CoC for Vim, and I see no problem with that.
I don't think this discussion has reached the point (yet) where it's simply about avoiding offence or getting bullied into a decision.
Depends on your viewpoint. If you have a small plugin or personal project like CoC, without any ambitions to reach many people, such a joke is fine in my book. But in this case, it seems to hinder the adoption and growth of the language, so it makes a lot of sense to switch to a less offensive name. Especially since the language seems to aim to get more widespread usage.
As a man, I hadn't thought of the potential problems for women in this sphere (quelle surprise); that is absolutely the strongest argument for change. We should all strive to be inclusive and it seems the leaders in the Coq community are taking that seriously, and should be applauded.
My two penneth worth on the variants that still include Coq in the name (like 'Le Coq', etc.) is that it'll just get shortened down to Coq in real-world use. English tends to shorten terms to the minimum word or phrase that still conveys meaning.
FTFY
It's just particularly noticable with English because the more people speak a language, the more people work on trimming out the fat (consciously or unconsciously).
Because women are more prudish than men? Or because the joke is about the male member? So if it was called "Qunt", it would be men that were clamouring for a name change?
Are you sure you’re not making sexist assumptions about women being prudish?
The article even says women have been harassed speaking about it.
Look I already said I think it's an awkward name for men and women, but this feels like a failure of imagination to me.
> This similarity has already led to some women turning away from Coq and others getting harassed when they said they were working on Coq
If there are people in the community purposely ignorant of the French entomology and using the similarity to "cock" to troll or harass others does the project changing it's name even help? Those people are still present. Perhaps cutting off such an avenue does reduce toxicity but it feels like catering to the lowest common denominator. Is it too much to expect basic decency these days?
Not to mention the English normative focus. Have there been other large projects that felt the need to change their name because of connotations in languages other than English?
The only thing new is the degree of performative offense by reactionary elites at people “getting offended” as a response to every complaint of substantive patterns of harm (not mere offense) as a distraction from actual problems.
maybe that's the issue – the obvious problems seem unsurmountable, so let's do just about anything else.
Parkinsons law on bikeshedding/triviality: the least relevant topic on the agenda gets the most attention.
While it was never renamed, GIMPs name has drawn objectors since well before 2016.
The only reason this is a big deal instead of routine like those is the current backlash against "PC culture" or "SJW"s.
Or Agda (the hen): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPY42kkRADc
Given this, "Coq" is clearly a fuqing problematic name, and unless it's absolutely intended to have the double meaning, it should probably be changed somehow.
A clear alternate pronounciation of "coke" (with optional circumflex), would seem easiest to implement. At least, try it for a while and see if it works?
i) If people is being harassed because of the name of their workplace, then the problem is the harasser. Changing the name of the workplace is a bit like victim shaming, in the sense that the real problem is the harasser.
ii) If people have difficulties talking about their workplace name, then I think it's people's problem.
Yes, but the connotation is arguably quite NSFW. If it would be named penis directly, it should not make a difference either, but it does. Throwing in "we should use cock!" in a meeting will get you glances at first and surely some more afterwards, even if you clarify.
Ask the companies named ISIS (there are quite a few) how the name worked out for them; same thing here.
> If people have difficulties talking about their workplace name, then I think it's people's problem.
Yes, but it is then, in turn, your problem, as you loose out on quite a few people - either because they don't want the trouble with the name or because it simply deters them. Marketing is extremely important.
In all things, there are limits - and "coq", as it is presently pronounced, is obviously breaching those limits, or the problem wouldn't be there.
Yes, but I'm not convinced this would actually take hold. The Voltswagen thread had a lot of discussion about this and quite a few were convinced that the "american" pronunciation is as valid as the canonical German one. So, in the end, it would probably remain "cock" for a lot of people.
> At least, try it for a while and see if it works?
A name change, even if only in pronunciation, is a rather large and conflicting change. Doing this twice looks like a recipe for disaster.
If after a while that resolves the problem or at least sufficiently minimises it, you're done.
If not, I think you have a clear go-ahead to make a big, breaking change.
This reminds me of the issue with the word "negro" (Spanish for black) in some schools of the USA. It seems some people couldn't understand that that word was there for centuries before the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Are we going to adapt every language to avoid negative connotations in English (or the common tongue of our era)? If you are an English speaker you should be used to pronounciation exceptions, being an almost no-rule pronunciation language. Pronounce it like you want ("coqi", "le coq" or whatever you want) but changing the name for all speakers (even the non-English ones)? That's a big no-no for me.
Perhaps Americans should just stop using Coq; anything of value in that area is developed in Europe anyway. When the product is finished, Americans try to govern or market it.
Among the GitHub suggestions there is "peep":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peep_show
But "peeps" seems to be safe in our great moral beacon, the USSA!
I guess the question is, why shouldn't the Coq project think about this kind of thing?