We don’t get to decide whether “master” is a problem. The rest of the world
has already decided that it is a problem.

Our task is to replace the terms “master” and “slave” in Solr.

wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)

> On Jun 18, 2020, at 6:50 PM, Rahul Goswami <rahul196...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with Phill, Noble and Ilan above. The problematic term is "slave"
> (not master) which I am all for changing if it causes less regression than
> removing BOTH master and slave. Since some people have pointed out Github
> changing the "master" terminology, in my personal opinion, it was not a
> measured response to addressing the bigger problem we are all trying to
> tackle. There is no concept of a "slave" branch, and "master" by itself is
> a pretty generic term (Is someone having "mastery" over a skill a bad
> thing?). I fear all it would end up achieving in the end with Github is a
> mess of broken build scripts at best.
> So +1 on "slave" being the problematic term IMO, not "master".
> 
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:19 PM Phill Campbell
> <sirgilli...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Master - Worker
>> Master - Peon
>> Master - Helper
>> Master - Servant
>> 
>> The term that is not wanted is “slave’. The term “master” is not a problem
>> IMO.
>> 
>>> On Jun 18, 2020, at 3:59 PM, Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I support Mike Drob and Trey Grainger. We shuold re-use the
>> leader/replica
>>> terminology from Cloud. Even if you hand-configure a master/slave cluster
>>> and orchestrate what doc goes to which node/shard, and hand-code your
>> shards
>>> parameter, you will still have a cluster where you’d send updates to the
>> leader of
>>> each shard and the replicas would replicate the index from the leader.
>>> 
>>> Let’s instead find a new good name for the cluster type. Standalone kind
>> of works
>>> for me, but I see it can be confused with single-node. We have also
>> discussed
>>> replacing SolrCloud (which is a terrible name) with something more
>> descriptive.
>>> 
>>> Today: SolrCloud vs Master/slave
>>> Alt A: SolrCloud vs Standalone
>>> Alt B: SolrCloud vs Legacy
>>> Alt C: Clustered vs Independent
>>> Alt D: Clustered vs Manual mode
>>> 
>>> Jan
>>> 
>>>> 18. jun. 2020 kl. 15:53 skrev Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>:
>>>> 
>>>> I personally think that using Solr cloud terminology for this would be
>> fine
>>>> with leader/follower. The leader is the one that accepts updates,
>> followers
>>>> cascade the updates somehow. The presence of ZK or election doesn’t
>> really
>>>> change this detail.
>>>> 
>>>> However, if folks feel that it’s confusing, then I can’t tell them that
>>>> they’re not confused. Especially when they’re working with others who
>> have
>>>> less Solr experience than we do and are less familiar with the
>> intricacies.
>>>> 
>>>> Primary/Replica seems acceptable. Coordinator instead of Overseer seems
>>>> acceptable.
>>>> 
>>>> Would love to see this in 9.0!
>>>> 
>>>> Mike
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:25 AM John Gallagher
>>>> <jgallag...@slack-corp.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> While on the topic of renaming roles, I'd like to propose finding a
>> better
>>>>> term than "overseer" which has historical slavery connotations as well.
>>>>> Director, perhaps?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> John Gallagher
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:48 AM Jason Gerlowski <gerlowsk...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1 to rename master/slave, and +1 to choosing terminology distinct
>>>>>> from what's used for SolrCloud.  I could be happy with several of the
>>>>>> proposed options.  Since a good few have been proposed though, maybe
>>>>>> an eventual vote thread is the most organized way to aggregate the
>>>>>> opinions here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm less positive about the prospect of changing the name of our
>>>>>> primary git branch.  Most projects that contributors might come from,
>>>>>> most tutorials out there to learn git, most tools built on top of git
>>>>>> - the majority are going to assume "master" as the main branch.  I
>>>>>> appreciate the change that Github is trying to effect in changing the
>>>>>> default for new projects, but it'll be a long time before that
>>>>>> competes with the huge bulk of projects, documentation, etc. out there
>>>>>> using "master".  Our contributors are smart and I'm sure they'd figure
>>>>>> it out if we used "main" or something else instead, but having a
>>>>>> non-standard git setup would be one more "papercut" in understanding
>>>>>> how to contribute to a project that already makes that harder than it
>>>>>> should.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 7:33 AM Demian Katz <
>> demian.k...@villanova.edu>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regarding people having a problem with the word "master" -- GitHub is
>>>>>> changing the default branch name away from "master," even in isolation
>>>>> from
>>>>>> a "slave" pairing... so the terminology seems to be falling out of
>> favor
>>>>> in
>>>>>> all contexts. See:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://www.cnet.com/news/microsofts-github-is-removing-coding-terms-like-master-and-slave/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I'm not here to start a debate about the semantics of that, just to
>>>>>> provide evidence that in some communities, the term "master" is
>> causing
>>>>>> concern all by itself. If we're going to make the change anyway, it
>> might
>>>>>> be best to get it over with and pick the most appropriate terminology
>> we
>>>>>> can agree upon, rather than trying to minimize the amount of change.
>> It's
>>>>>> going to be backward breaking anyway, so we might as well do it all
>> now
>>>>>> rather than risk having to go through two separate breaking changes at
>>>>>> different points in time.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> - Demian
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Noble Paul <noble.p...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 1:51 AM
>>>>>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Getting rid of Master/Slave nomenclature in
>>>>> Solr
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Looking at the code I see a 692 occurrences of the word "slave".
>>>>>>> Mostly variable names and ref guide docs.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The word "slave" is present in the responses as well. Any change in
>> the
>>>>>> request param/response payload is backward incompatible.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have no objection to changing the names in ref guide and other
>>>>>> internal variables. Going ahead with backward incompatible changes is
>>>>>> painful. If somebody has the appetite to take it up, it's OK
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If we must change, master/follower can be a good enough option.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> master (noun): A man in charge of an organization or group.
>>>>>>> master(adj) : having or showing very great skill or proficiency.
>>>>>>> master(verb): acquire complete knowledge or skill in (a subject,
>>>>>> technique, or art).
>>>>>>> master (verb): gain control of; overcome.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I hope nobody has a problem with the term "master"
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:19 PM Ilan Ginzburg <ilans...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Would master/follower work?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Half the rename work while still getting rid of the slavery
>>>>>> connotation...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu 18 Jun 2020 at 07:13, Walter Underwood <
>> wun...@wunderwood.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 17, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> It has been interesting watching this discussion play out on
>>>>>>>>>> multiple
>>>>>>>>> open source mailing lists.  On other projects, I have seen a VERY
>>>>>>>>> high level of resistance to these changes, which I find disturbing
>>>>>>>>> and surprising.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yes, it is nice to see everyone just pitch in and do it on this
>>>>> list.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wunder
>>>>>>>>> Walter Underwood
>>>>>>>>> wun...@wunderwood.org
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fobs
>>>>>>>>> erver.wunderwood.org
>>>>> %2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdemian.katz%40villanova.e
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> du%7C1eef0604700a442deb7e08d8134b97fb%7C765a8de5cf9444f09cafae5bf8cf
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> a366%7C0%7C0%7C637280562684672329&amp;sdata=0GyK5Tlq0PGsWxl%2FirJOVN
>>>>>>>>> VaFCELlEChdxuLJ5RxdQs%3D&amp;reserved=0  (my blog)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Noble Paul
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 

Reply via email to