Hi Adam, 1. Mesos Agent 2. Mesos Agent 3. No but is master-agent a logical coupling? 4. +1 Dave, documentation, then API, then rest of the code base. We should also make sure that we only have to change once and that we cover all the connotations that might offend.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Dave Lester <d...@davelester.org> wrote: > Hi Adam, > > I've been using Master/Worker in presentations for the past 9 months and > it hasn't led to any confusion. > > 1. Mesos worker > 2. Mesos worker > 3. No > 4. Documentation, then API with a full deprecation cycle > > Dave > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015, at 02:18 PM, Adam Bordelon wrote: > > There has been much discussion about finding a less offensive name than > "Slave", and many of these thoughts have been captured in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1478 > > I would like to open up the discussion on this topic for one week, and if > we cannot arrive at a lazy consensus, I will draft a proposal from the > discussion and call for a VOTE. > Here are the questions I would like us to answer: > 1. What should we call the "Mesos Slave" node/host/machine? > 2. What should we call the "mesos-slave" process (could be the same)? > 3. Do we need to rename Mesos Master too? > > Another topic worth discussing is the deprecation process, but we don't > necessarily need to decide on that at the same time as deciding the new > name(s). > 4. How will we phase in the new name and phase out the old name? > > Please voice your thoughts and opinions below. > > Thanks! > -Adam- > > P.S. My personal thoughts: > 1. Mesos Worker [Node] > 2. Mesos Worker or Agent > 3. No > 4. Carefully > > >
