On Sat, 2019-05-04 at 11:33 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > I don't have a good answer for this. I didn't find an explanation one > way or the other, but there are uses of "slave copies" that aren't > "copied from master" in Google, but usually not in > recording/publishing > fields. > > I just don't know whether "slave copy" is implied in "master copy" or > whether it's completely disconnected from the term. If it's > completely > disconnected, where does "mastering" come from? > > Let me know if you find good etymologies for the verb "master". I > couldn't think of any way that it wouldn't be related to a master > copy > and its "slave" copies.
I’m not willing to do research on this, but if you take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio), it mentions that it’s the process of preparing and transferring the final audio to a master (canonical, original) storage device, which will serve as a template for all future copies. I don’t understand the obsession with pairing master-anything with slaves. In this concrete example, the better analogy would be cloning - the copies are, for all intents and purposes, identical to the one true original. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
