+1 master/slave, no change needed Such a change is a waste of time with no technical benefit. Also agree with Itamar, a breaking change like this will cause upgrade pains.
Cheers On 4 June 2015 at 17:08, tommy xiao <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to James DeFelice. I don't feel the name is confuse for any > circumstance. > > 2015-06-04 22:06 GMT+08:00 James DeFelice <[email protected]>: > >> -1 master/worker >> -1 master/agent >> -1 leader/follower >> >> +1 master/slave; no change needed >> >> There's no technical benefit **at all** to a terminology change at this >> point. If people want to change the names in their client presentations >> that's fine. Master/slave conveys specific meaning that is lost otherwise. >> In this context of this project (and elsewhere in Engineering-related >> fields) the terms are technical jargon and have no social implications >> within such context. >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Till Toenshoff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 1. Mesos Worker [node/host/machine] >>> 2. Mesos Worker [process] >>> 3. No, master/worker seems to address the issue with less changes. >>> 4. Begin using the new name ASAP, add a disambiguation to the docs, and >>> change old references over time. Fixing the "official" name, even before >>> changes are in place, would be a good first step. >>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> James DeFelice >> 585.241.9488 (voice) >> 650.649.6071 (fax) >> > > > > -- > Deshi Xiao > Twitter: xds2000 > E-mail: xiaods(AT)gmail.com >
