couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noah Slater (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-2248) Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
Date Tue, 27 May 2014 00:01:06 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14009154#comment-14009154
] 

Noah Slater commented on COUCHDB-2248:
--------------------------------------

If "primary" suggests a write master, then certainly "master" and "multi-master" suggest a
write master. So the same concern you raise applies to the existing terminology. Would it
make sense to replace "master" with "peer" then?

> Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
> ----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COUCHDB-2248
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>          Components: Documentation
>            Reporter: Noah Slater
>            Priority: Trivial
>
> Inspired by the comments on this PR:
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692
> Summary is: `master` and `slave` are racially charged terms, and it would be good to
avoid them. Django have gone for `primary` and `replica`. But we also have to deal with what
we now call multi-master setups. I propose "peer to peer" as a replacement, or just "peer"
if you're describing one node.
> As far as I can tell, the primary work here is the docs. The wiki and any supporting
material can be updated after.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message