couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Morj Lomakin (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-2248) Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
Date Thu, 29 May 2014 20:43:03 GMT


Morj Lomakin commented on COUCHDB-2248:

While avoiding controversial terminology might be good for the project as an easy solution
(just to distantiate from it), I don't think it is a right path for the publicly available
software industry at general. Avoiding taboo words will not change history, as well as the
meaning of them. OTOH, using master-slave exclusively as a database replication terminology
will eventually wash out other (negative) meanings. And 'slave' will just mean "passive data
replication unit", or something like that. Hydraulic and pneumatic systems or railway locomotives
will bring even more technology-related meaning to this word. Why not take this path? What
are the chances to completely remove a word from the language against just erasing offending
meanings over time?

> Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
> ----------------------------------------
>                 Key: COUCHDB-2248
>                 URL:
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>          Components: Documentation
>            Reporter: Noah Slater
>            Assignee: Alexander Shorin
>            Priority: Trivial
> Inspired by the comments on this PR:
> 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

View raw message