+1 master/slave. These are only terminologies in software architecture. They have different definitions from those of social or political view.
发件人: zhou weitao [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2015年6月5日 10:40 收件人: [email protected] 主题: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming Mesos Slave +1 master/slave, no change needed. 2015-06-05 0:10 GMT+08:00 Ankur Chauhan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 +1 master/slave James made some very good points and there is no technical reason for wasting time on this. On 04/06/2015 08:45, James Vanns wrote: > +1 master/slave, no change needed. > > I couldn't agree more. This is a barmy request; master/slave is a > well understood common convention (if it isn't well defined). This > is making an issue out of something that isn't. Not at least as far > as I see it - I don't have a habit of confusing software/systems > nomenclature with moral high ground. This would just be a waste of > time and not just for developers but for those adopting/who have > adopted Mesos. If it were a brand new project at the early stages > of just throwing ideas around, then fine - call master/slave > whatever you want. Gru/Minion would get my vote if that were the > case ;) > > Cheers, > > Jim > > > On 4 June 2015 at 16:23, Eren Güven > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > +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]<mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[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 <tel:585.241.9488> (voice) > 650.649.6071 <tel:650.649.6071> (fax) > > > > > -- Deshi Xiao Twitter: xds2000 E-mail: xiaods(AT)gmail.com<http://gmail.com> > <http://gmail.com> > > > > > > -- -- Senior Code Pig Industrial Light & Magic -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVcHhwAAoJEOSJAMhvLp3L8E4H/2ug5bAs5S7sZrGVZyp4vdki tEd67eQDu1gXCV1fC6VqStnlGG9UHG95/RaCkiLLEmtbYBIY4f+6Urbwoo0P4Qyh sU4Z0y3cdXkibH1DTIwT3tRXa/yp9Msx+KAI6NqXvfOtnLVXXtT4nKD9BCQ/+u98 afvICT1z25lBiYjBaZaVlrJRFtZkmRzVhwWiSnmtfyBfyvwbg8tEGoR1mqf3h7D5 ZpxTUvjLc1sF0NNLFTt30ReJfynOGY0tNfozi9Ubf5Hs7/3xfuHSBDVDm1+2EP4/ cHEMs2S0+54JsgSTGBGq4PGL/nKQ8vuwjzVihgQXpA3CU8QBikuvdRc/UBwDaR0= =niNh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
