I think it would be less of an issue if human slavery and all its attendant and resultant issues were actually firmly a thing of the past. It could become a “clinical”, accurate way to describe technical constellations where one component is strictly subordinate to another, if it didn’t have the connotation of ongoing human rights issues.
Not saying it’s the best or the only option for the terminology, just wondering aloud whether the callback would be an issue if the topic wasn’t still so raw and sore.
I like parent/child. Add something? Parent adopts. Remove something? Parent abandons, leaving the process or component with trauma that will require years of therapy.
Eh, I think master is used (AFAIK) unproblematicly in other contexts like a master key, recording master, and master pattern. Converting it to “main” seems like a change or loss of meaning, but the problem may be that there is not really a consistent meaning across electronics usage to start with. I think “secondary” has some connotation of filling the same purpose or type as the primary, which doesn’t really fit for m/s usage. Master/sheep is my most similar option that keeps the “m/s”, but it feels awkward enough to draw attention to what it replaces. Could just do master (or main) and sub, where “sub” could mean substitute, subordinate, subscriber, [submissive,] etc. as needed.
Master/slave terminology needs to die off. What a blatant callback to slavery times.
Should be using Dom/Sub amirite?
Oh, surely you must’ve meant Kermit/Miss Piggy.
Yes.
Noo! It just needs to become kinky instead.
I think it would be less of an issue if human slavery and all its attendant and resultant issues were actually firmly a thing of the past. It could become a “clinical”, accurate way to describe technical constellations where one component is strictly subordinate to another, if it didn’t have the connotation of ongoing human rights issues.
Not saying it’s the best or the only option for the terminology, just wondering aloud whether the callback would be an issue if the topic wasn’t still so raw and sore.
I like parent/child. Add something? Parent adopts. Remove something? Parent abandons, leaving the process or component with trauma that will require years of therapy.
Then you get people asking how you kill abandoned child processes
“All orphans will eventually become zombies” -My OS lecturer last year
-9
I quite agree. Personally I use Main/Secondary, I find it does away with the problematic terminology while needing no changes in acronyms.
Eh, I think master is used (AFAIK) unproblematicly in other contexts like a master key, recording master, and master pattern. Converting it to “main” seems like a change or loss of meaning, but the problem may be that there is not really a consistent meaning across electronics usage to start with. I think “secondary” has some connotation of filling the same purpose or type as the primary, which doesn’t really fit for m/s usage. Master/sheep is my most similar option that keeps the “m/s”, but it feels awkward enough to draw attention to what it replaces. Could just do master (or main) and sub, where “sub” could mean substitute, subordinate, subscriber, [submissive,] etc. as needed.
I like sender/receiver
Pitcher/catcher?
No, no, perhaps not.
leader/follower for things like Paxos and RAID arrays works okay.