On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:19 AM Joey Frazee <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think this is an important thing to do from the standpoint of being > welcoming (this is in the current code of conduct btw).
That is my reason for supporting. When I ask myself, is this name unwelcoming? I concluded that it likely is for some. Based on that I decided to support changing the name. > > I’ve repeated this elsewhere but I was on a team 7 years ago where someone > asked us to stop using terminology including master and slave because it made > them uncomfortable. As team mates and friends it was an easy thing for us to > do; and likely much harder for that individual to ask for or previously live > with than any code change. > > A wait to see where ASF and GitHub land is a surely a legitimate approach, > but it’s probably important to put a time bound on it to avoid a delay. > > -joey > On Jun 18, 2020, 9:44 AM -0500, Keith Turner <[email protected]>, wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:47 PM Kepner, Jeremy - LLSC - MITLL > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Will it break user code? > > > > I don't think the change has to break existing code, could use > > deprecation for APIs. The properties could be automatically > > translated with a warning logged or servers could refuse to start if > > old properties are seen with a clear message telling the user what to > > do. I think we can find a sensible path that changes the name and > > minimizes problems. > > > > > > > > > On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:44 PM, Brian Loss <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree—things have changed in the world since this was last discussed, > > > > and I think it’s time to make the change even though it will be > > > > disruptive. I support changing both the master branch and Accumulo > > > > master service names as well, and am willing to help out with the work > > > > to get it done. > > > > > > > > Mike, do we need to have some consensus on the names before the vote? > > > > That is, can the vote select a name from a list, or must it purely be a > > > > +/- vote for a specific choice? It might be better to have more > > > > discussion in this discuss thread (or in a ticket) before a vote is > > > > held. > > > > > > > > > On Jun 17, 2020, at 3:37 PM, Michael Wall <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I support changing both the name of the Accumulo master service and > > > > > the > > > > > master branch name. Should we start a vote? Maybe we need to > > > > > understand > > > > > the full scope of what will be required before we can do that. > > > > > Billie, do > > > > > you want to start the ticket you mentioned? > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:18 PM Owens, Mark <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds like GitHub is considering changing 'master' to 'main'. That > > > > > > could > > > > > > also be a possibility. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 3:07 PM > > > > > > To: Accumulo Dev List <[email protected]> > > > > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Rename Accumulo master > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Accumulo folks! I would like to start a discussion about > > > > > > renaming the > > > > > > Accumulo master. Previous discussions were held a few years ago > > > > > > [1]. Some > > > > > > things have changed since we started that discussion, in the world > > > > > > and in > > > > > > our project governance, so I think it is worth revisiting this > > > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > > > > > If people agree that a rename would be worthwhile, we can start > > > > > > identifying the many changes that would need to be made (probably a > > > > > > GitHub > > > > > > issue would be a good place for that). This will be a big change > > > > > > and I am > > > > > > happy to help work on it. If anyone else is interested in helping > > > > > > out too, > > > > > > I think we should be able to break the work down into several > > > > > > discrete > > > > > > tasks. > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe the best replacement names we came up with on the original > > > > > > ticket were Coordinator and Conductor. I also wanted to suggest > > > > > > another > > > > > > possibility that I don't think we considered: Admin / AdminServer. > > > > > > Admin is > > > > > > generic, but at least it's short. Feel free to share your thoughts > > > > > > and > > > > > > other ideas, if you have them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Billie > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2844 > > > > > > > > > > > > >
