[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14009144#comment-14009144
]
Noah Slater commented on COUCHDB-2248:
--------------------------------------
In the country where we have the most amount of users, slavery is indeed a
racial topic.
Being terms of art is besides the point. As one of the market leaders in
database technology, we get to set an example. Primary and replica are also
fairly commonly used, as the Django ticket evidences. MongoDB also seems to use
primary and replica. As does Engine Yard, my employer.
I don't see any harm (or confusion) in using primary, replica, and peer. And so
using these terms seems like a no-brainer to me.
I also note that as this is a documentation change, there are no vetos.
> 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)
