couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexander Shorin (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-2248) Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
Date Tue, 27 May 2014 16:23:02 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14009854#comment-14009854
] 

Alexander Shorin commented on COUCHDB-2248:
-------------------------------------------

[~nrdufour], obliviously django PR initiate this issue, but I'm -1 for blindly follow their
reasons for such changes. If we're going to change technical terminology we must provide technical
explanation as reasons of such changes. This explanation was found (in multi-master world
no one is a slave and this term doesn't fits any replication participant well), was found
suddenly not standard, but still RFC source which defines well suited alternative to slave
term for multi-master env., and was noted that "replica" word is ok for using instead of "slave".
Until we stand on CS ground and follow some common rules and agreements it's good to clarify
some bits (even if they are already looks "fine"). But applying any historical, racial and
others unrelated contexts to technical changes which only introduces confusion between tech
people is unacceptable. At least, that's my position.

> 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