Re: Terms for database replication

Aymeric +1 On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Everyone, > > It's exciting to see that much energy directed at Django! At the same > time, it's sad to see it tragically misused. > > If you want to help, there are currently 124 pull

Re: Terms for database replication

Everyone, It's exciting to see that much energy directed at Django! At the same time, it's sad to see it tragically misused. If you want to help, there are currently 124 pull requests on GitHub, 133 patches on Trac and 38 new tickets, all needing a review. Any of these would be a better use

Re: Terms for database replication

You're entitled to your own opinions, but you aren't entitled to your own facts. The terms primary/replica are extremely well established, perhaps even moreso than master/slave: https://imgur.com/a/pCp3d, the suggestion that this is a gross violation of computer science nomenclature is pure

Re: Terms for database replication

Alex, With all due respect (I mean it), The perception from the outside is that you didn't put the Django project best interest on the first line in that PR / merge but something more personal (plus being a confusing merge in terms of computer science). Cheers -- You received this message

Re: Terms for database replication

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Justin Holmes wrote: > OK. How about "canon" and "replica" ? I think we all get sent to the naughty step if we continue to discuss this, so I will just say that "master" is being used as an adjective in this context, it is the master

Re: Terms for database replication

OK. How about "canon" and "replica" ? On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Tom Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Justin Holmes > wrote: > > I don't want to devolve completely into an etymological circlejerk here, > but > > my sense

Re: Terms for database replication

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Justin Holmes wrote: > I don't want to devolve completely into an etymological circlejerk here, but > my sense is that "master" in the VCS sense is like "master key," rather than > describing the interpersonal relationship of involuntary

Re: Terms for database replication

Yup, the BDFL is still strong in this one ;) Cal On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > Hi everybody. > > The Django core developers have made our decision on the terminology we're > going to use; I'd ask that you stop using django-developers to debate

Re: Terms for database replication

Hi everybody. The Django core developers have made our decision on the terminology we're going to use; I'd ask that you stop using django-developers to debate this further. Alex On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Unai Zalakain wrote: > Greetings! > > > I saw that

Re: Terms for database replication

Greetings! I saw that someone suggested "leader" and "follower" - I haven't thought through whether I find this more palatable. Well, as an individualist I am, I find those terms quite uninviting too. Hoping to downplay it a bit, what about BDSM terms "Dominant" and "Submissive", "Dom" and

Re: Terms for database replication

I just want to clarify a few misunderstanding that I keep seeing popping up. 1. If you read the original ticket, https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/22667 you will notice that my original concern wasn't the word 'master', nor the word 'slave', but the usage of both terms together. What

Re: Terms for database replication

I don't want to devolve completely into an etymological circlejerk here, but my sense is that "master" in the VCS sense is like "master key," rather than describing the interpersonal relationship of involuntary servitude. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Malcolm Box wrote:

Re: Terms for database replication

FWIW, I think the main objection is to the word "slave", not to "master". Otherwise we'll be renaming the git branches soon... So "master" / "replica" would work. Malcolm On Thursday, 5 June 2014 16:26:07 UTC+1, Justin Holmes wrote: > > I think I agree that "primary" is a bad choice. Can you

Re: Terms for database replication

I think I agree that "primary" is a bad choice. Can you suggest something other than master? Something that will address the concerns posed in the past two threads? I saw that someone suggested "leader" and "follower" - I haven't thought through whether I find this more palatable. On Thu, Jun

Re: Terms for database replication

For once, I'm going to +1 you Tom. Cal On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Evans wrote: > Please revert this change as soon as possible. > > If the project has become so PC sensitive that the word "slave" is no > longer permitted to be uttered, then "replica" is an

Terms for database replication

Please revert this change as soon as possible. If the project has become so PC sensitive that the word "slave" is no longer permitted to be uttered, then "replica" is an alternate term, but "primary" is not. Have you ever set up "primary-primary replication"? No, neither have I. Master-master