mesos-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Schlansker <sschlans...@opentable.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming Mesos Slave
Date Mon, 08 Jun 2015 20:17:26 GMT

On Jun 8, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Aaron Carey <acarey@ilm.com> wrote:

> I've been following this thread with interest, it draws a lot of parallels with similar
problems my wife faces as a teacher (and I imagine this happens in other government/public
sector organisations, earlier in this thread James pointed me to an interested Wikipedia article
which suggested this also happens occasionally in software: eg County of Los Angeles in 2003).
Every few years teachers are told to change the words used to describe various things related
to kids with minority backgrounds, from underprivileged families or with disabilities and
so on, usually to stop other children from using them as derogatory terms or insults. It works
for a while and then the pupils catch on and start using the new words and the cycle repeats.
> 
> I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that if you do decide to change the naming
of master/slave because some naughty programmers in the community have been using the terms
offensively, you better make damn sure you choose new terms which aren't likely to cause offence
in the future and require the whole renaming process to run again. Which is why I'm voting
for:
> 
> +1 Gru/Minion

Which then is great right up until Universal Pictures sues the Apache foundation to get "Gru"
changed.  Plus "master/slave" is immediately obvious to anyone working in software.  I had
to search the web to even figure out what "Gru" was, and then it was not even the first result...
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate_%28Russia%29 )

> 
> There could also be another option: These terms are all being used to describe a master/slave
relationship, the mesos master is in charge, it assigns work to the slaves and ensures that
they carry it out. I'd suggest that whatever you call this pair, the relationship will always
be one of domination and servitude. Perhaps what is really needed here is to get rid of the
concept of a master altogether and re-architect mesos so all nodes in the cluster are equal
and reach a consensus together about work distribution and so on?

I propose all processes, regardless of function, should be "mesos-comrade" to ensure none
of them feel slighted :)

> 
> 
> From: Nikolay Borodachev [nborod@adobe.com]
> Sent: 06 June 2015 04:34
> To: user@mesos.apache.org
> Subject: RE: 答复: [DISCUSS] Renaming Mesos Slave
> 
> +1 master/slave – no need to change
>  
> From: Sam Salisbury [mailto:samsalisbury@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 8:31 AM
> To: user@mesos.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 答复: [DISCUSS] Renaming Mesos Slave
>  
> Master/Minion +1
>  
> On 5 June 2015 at 15:14, CCAAT <ccaat@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> "+1 master/slave, no change needed."  is the same as
> "master/slave"    I.E. keep the nomenclature as it currently is
> 
> This means keep the name 'master' and keep the name 'slave'.
> 
> 
> Are you applying fuzzy math or kalman filters to your summations below?
> 
> It looks to me, tallying things up, Master is kept as it is
> and 'Slave' is kept as it is. There did not seem to be any consensus
> on the new names if the pair names are updated. Or you can vote separately on each name?
On an  real ballot, you enter the choices,
> vote according to your needs, tally the results and publish them.
> Applying a 'fuzzy filter' to what has occurred in this debate so far
> is ridiculous.
> 
> Why not repost the question like this or something on a more fair
> voting preference:
> 
> ---------------->
> Please vote for your favourite Name-pair in Mesos, for what is currently
> "Master-Slave". Note Master-Slave is the "no change" vote option.
> 
> [] Master-Slave
> [] Mesos-Slave
> [] Mesos-Minion
> [] Master-Minion
> [] Master-Follower
> [] Mesos-Follower
> [] Master-worker
> [] Mesos-worker
> [] etc etc
> 
> <-----------------
> 
> 
> Tally the result and go from there.
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/05/2015 04:27 AM, Adam Bordelon wrote:
> Wow, what a response! Allow me to attempt to summarize the sentiment so far.
> 
> Let's start with the implicit question,
> _0. Should we rename Mesos Slave?_
> +1 (Explicit approval) 12, including 7 from JIRA
> +0.5 (Implicit approval, suggested alternate name) 18
> -0.5 (Some disapproval, wouldn't block it) 5, including 1 from JIRA
> -1 (Strong disapproval) 16
> 
> _1. What should we call the "Mesos Slave" node/host/machine?_
> Worker: +10, -2
> Agent: +6
> Follower (+Leader): +4, -1
> Minion: +2, -1
> Drone (+Director/Queen): +2
> Resource-Agent/Provider: +2
> 
> _2. What should we call the "mesos-slave" process (could be the same)?_
> Pretty much everybody says that it should be the same as the node.
> 
> _3. Do we need to rename Mesos Master too?_
> Most say No, except when slave's new name has a preferred pairing (e.g.
> Follower/Leader)
> 
> _4. How will we phase in the new name and phase out the old name?_
> To calm any fears, we would have to go through a full deprecation cycle,
> introducing the new name in one release, while maintaining
> symlinks/aliases/duplicate-endpoints for the old name. In a subsequent
> release, we can remove the old name/endpoints. As we introduce the new
> Mesos 1.0 HTTP API, we will already be introducing breaking API changes,
> so this would be an ideal time to do a rename.
> 
> Whether or not we decide to officially change the name in the code/APIs,
> some organizations are already using alternative terminologies in their
> presentations/scripts. We could at least try to agree upon a recommended
> alternative name for these purposes.
> 
> _5. How do we vote on this?_
> First, FYI: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> It seems there are two potentially separate items to vote on:
> 
> Prop-A: Rename Mesos-Slave in the code/APIs
> Qualifies as a "code modification", so a negative (binding) vote
> constitutes a veto. Note that there are no -1s from the Mesos PMC yet.
> After this week of discussion where the community is invited to share
> their thoughts/opinions, we will call for an official VOTE from the PMC
> members. The proposal will pass if there are at least three positive
> votes and no negative ones.
> 
> Prop-B: Recommended Alternative Name for "Slave"
> This can follow the common format of majority rule. We can gather
> recommendations during this one week discussion period, and then vote on
> the top 2-3 finalists.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Emilien Kenler <ekenler@wizcorp.jp
> <mailto:ekenler@wizcorp.jp>> wrote:
> 
>     +1 for keeping master/slave.
> 
>     On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Panyungao (Wingoal)
>     <panyungao@huawei.com <mailto:panyungao@huawei.com>> wrote:
> 
>         +1  master/slave. ____
> 
>         __ __
> 
>         These are only terminologies in software architecture.  They
>         have different definitions from those of social or political
>         view. ____
> 
>         __ __
> 
>         *发件人:*zhou weitao [mailto:zhouwtlord@gmail.com
>         <mailto:zhouwtlord@gmail.com>]
>         *发送时间:*2015年6月5日10:40
>         *收件人:*user@mesos.apache.org <mailto:user@mesos.apache.org>
>         *主题:*Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming Mesos Slave____
> 
>         __ __
> 
>         +1 master/slave, no change needed.____
> 
>         __ __
> 
>         2015-06-05 0:10 GMT+08:00 Ankur Chauhan <ankur@malloc64.com
>         <mailto:ankur@malloc64.com>>:____
> 
>         -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>         Hash: SHA1
> 
>         +1 master/slave
> 
>         James made some very good points and there is no technical
>         reason for
>         wasting time on this.
> 
>         On 04/06/2015 08:45, James Vanns wrote:
>         > +1 master/slave, no change needed.
>         >
>         > I couldn't agree more. This is a barmy request; master/slave is a
>         > well understood common convention (if it isn't well defined). This
>         > is making an issue out of something that isn't. Not at least as far
>         > as I see it - I don't have a habit of confusing software/systems
>         > nomenclature with moral high ground. This would just be a waste of
>         > time and not just for developers but for those adopting/who have
>         > adopted Mesos. If it were a brand new project at the early stages
>         > of just throwing ideas around, then fine - call master/slave
>         > whatever you want. Gru/Minion would get my vote if that were the
>         > case ;)
>         >
>         > Cheers,
>         >
>         > Jim
>         >
>         >
>         > On 4 June 2015 at 16:23, Eren Güven <erenguven0@gmail.com <mailto:erenguven0@gmail.com>
>         > <mailto:erenguven0@gmail.com <mailto:erenguven0@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
>         >
>         > +1 master/slave, no change needed
>         >
>         > Such a change is a waste of time with no technical benefit. Also
>         > agree with Itamar, a breaking change like this will cause upgrade
>         > pains.
>         >
>         > Cheers
>         >
>         > On 4 June 2015 at 17:08, tommy xiao <xiaods@gmail.com <mailto:xiaods@gmail.com>
>         > <mailto:xiaods@gmail.com <mailto:xiaods@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         > +1 to James DeFelice.  I don't feel the name is confuse for any
>         > circumstance.
>         >
>         > 2015-06-04 22:06 GMT+08:00 James DeFelice <james.defelice@gmail.com <mailto:james.defelice@gmail.com>
>         > <mailto:james.defelice@gmail.com <mailto:james.defelice@gmail.com>>>:
>         >
>         > -1 master/worker -1 master/agent -1 leader/follower
>         >
>         > +1 master/slave; no change needed
>         >
>         > There's no technical benefit **at all** to a terminology change at
>         > this point. If people want to change the names in their client
>         > presentations that's fine. Master/slave conveys specific meaning
>         > that is lost otherwise. In this context of this project (and
>         > elsewhere in Engineering-related fields) the terms are technical
>         > jargon and have no social implications within such context.
>         >
>         >
>         > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Till Toenshoff <toenshoff@me.com <mailto:toenshoff@me.com>
>         > <mailto:toenshoff@me.com <mailto:toenshoff@me.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >> 1. Mesos Worker [node/host/machine] 2. Mesos Worker [process] 3.
>         >> No, master/worker seems to address the issue with less changes.
>         >> 4. Begin using the new name ASAP, add a disambiguation to the
>         >> docs, and change old references over time. Fixing the "official"
>         >> name, even before changes are in place, would be a good first
>         >> step.
>         >
>         > +1
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > -- James DeFelice585.241.9488 <tel:585.241.9488> <tel:585.241.9488
>         <tel:585.241.9488>> (voice)
>         >650.649.6071 <tel:650.649.6071> <tel:650.649.6071
>         <tel:650.649.6071>> (fax)
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > -- Deshi Xiao Twitter: xds2000 E-mail: xiaods(AT)gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
>         > <http://gmail.com>
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > -- -- Senior Code Pig Industrial Light & Magic
>         -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
>         iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVcHhwAAoJEOSJAMhvLp3L8E4H/2ug5bAs5S7sZrGVZyp4vdki
>         tEd67eQDu1gXCV1fC6VqStnlGG9UHG95/RaCkiLLEmtbYBIY4f+6Urbwoo0P4Qyh
>         sU4Z0y3cdXkibH1DTIwT3tRXa/yp9Msx+KAI6NqXvfOtnLVXXtT4nKD9BCQ/+u98
>         afvICT1z25lBiYjBaZaVlrJRFtZkmRzVhwWiSnmtfyBfyvwbg8tEGoR1mqf3h7D5
>         ZpxTUvjLc1sF0NNLFTt30ReJfynOGY0tNfozi9Ubf5Hs7/3xfuHSBDVDm1+2EP4/
>         cHEMs2S0+54JsgSTGBGq4PGL/nKQ8vuwjzVihgQXpA3CU8QBikuvdRc/UBwDaR0=
>         =niNh
>         -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----____
> 
>         __ __
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     --
>     <http://www.wizcorp.jp/>    Emilien Kenler
>     Server Engineer | Wizcorp Inc. <http://www.wizcorp.jp/>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     TECH . GAMING . OPEN-SOURCE WIZARDS
>     + 81 (0)3-4550-1448|Website <http://www.wizcorp.jp/>|Twitter
>     <https://twitter.com/Wizcorp>|Facebook
>     <http://www.facebook.com/Wizcorp>|LinkedIn
>     <http://www.linkedin.com/company/wizcorp>
> 


Mime
View raw message