[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14009143#comment-14009143
]
Robert Newson commented on COUCHDB-2248:
----------------------------------------
-1. For one thing, your claim that master/slave terminology is racially charged
is itself racially charged (there is such a thing as white slavery and the
terms also apply in BDSM).
These are terms of art in our application domain, it will be difficult to
discuss the particulars of our database without using them. As Joan notes, we
can't fully purge the term "master" anyway.
I am +1 on saying "peer" where it reads well. master/slave is just one
configuration of couchdb and among the least interesting.
> Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-2248
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: public(Regular issues)
> Components: Documentation
> Reporter: Noah Slater
> Priority: Trivial
>
> Inspired by the comments on this PR:
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692
> 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
(v6.2#6252)
