It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • Zozano@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    Oh man, wait till they hear about how I riced both my master and slave servers. I threw so many RGB LEDs on them, they look like recipients of a Fukoshima clown bukkake.

    • x3x3@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      Changing terminology also creates a mess and lots of confusion. I always want to check out the master branch but some people now started calling it main. I don’t mind either way but constantly changing it is horrible

    • usrtrv@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      4 months ago

      That doesn’t make sense depending on the context. New I2C standard switched to controller/target for example. This conveys that one device is controlling the other devices.

  • theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Primary/secondary means they’re all doing their thing, but one is preferred. There’s no instruction going on between them

    If you have a primary and secondary web servers, you’ll use the primary first, but the secondary or secondaries are a fallback

    If you have a primary and secondary drive, you have two drives, one of which is more important (probably because you booted from it). The secondary could be a copy or just another drive, either way the OS or a raid controller is managing it, one drive doesn’t manage another

    Similarly, we have dispatch/worker- the difference between that and master/slave is that they’re different things. A master should be able to work without a slave, and a slave should be capable of being promoted to master - a dispatcher can’t do the work and the worker can’t take over if the dispatch goes down

    The funny thing is we don’t use master/slave much anymore, the whole premise is that the slave doesn’t start to do what it does when it starts up. I can’t think of any examples of it in the past decade - other paradigms, with a different relationship and a different name, have replaced it

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      This is true. Warm standby is more or less obsolete in favor of n+1 load sharing.

      I think for most cases you could use primary and standby for master slave replacements.

    • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Redis, rabbitmq. There are infrastructure where all nodes work but only one node is responsible for properly and timely synchronizing changes, which is a hard problem to solve in a distributed fashion.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        That doesn’t really match the master/slave relationship. The distributed instances aren’t slaved to the master. They’re each doing their own thing, but as part of that they have a hierarchical relationship when it comes to synchronization

        Distributed computing gets more into the concept of swarms. Each piece is autonomous, and the swarm self-organizes. We made up a bunch of paradigms around this that were basically obsolete by the time we needed them - I think the relationship here is leader/follower, but I’ve never heard that terminology outside the classroom

        They’re sharded. It’s like host/mirror, except each mirror is an equally correct part of the real picture

        One of them is the leader, but it doesn’t control the rest of them. It just coordinates them

        When you get into swarm concepts, like sharding or activitypub, it doesn’t make sense to describe the relationship between nodes anymore. The relationship between any two nodes is “part of the same swarm”. You describe the nature of the swarm as a whole, or the behavior of individual nodes

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I’m a developer. I use main/release/dev for new projects, because it just sounds better and is more intuitive to me honestly. “Master” doesn’t make much sense. Like what’s so “master” about a “master branch”? It’s just the main branch everything gets merged into. It doesn’t “control” branches. There’s no “master/slave” relationship there. So again, “master” was never really intuitive to me.

    Old projects don’t get relabeled, they stay master, cause relabeling the main branch could cause potential problems. That’s my two cents.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Did you know that most people are not developers, and for many other use cases “master” does in fact imply control?

      Edit: I guess not

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        We’re talking about computing here. At least the post does. I guess you could be a QA engineer or something else, but this discussion is mostly a thing with developers.

    • jacksilver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think that’s because in computer science most master/slave nomenclature comes from hardware with a command/control structure (still notable in things like Spark where the namenode/master node controls the data nodes).

      GIT just took naming conventions from other existing design patterns (although I should probably look up sources to verify that assumption).

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Master can also mean proficiency. If you say you’ve mastered a trade it doesn’t mean you enslaved the trade, you simply have complete knowledge of the trade.

      So in that context, the master branch is the complete branch. The branch that other branches stem from because it’s the one with code from all the teams. You could branch from another team member’s branch but if that branch hasn’t merged from master in a while, it won’t have all the knowledge (code). When you merge in master you’re getting knowledge from elsewhere from the branch that’s aware of more things than your branch is: the branch that has mastery of the code, the master branch.

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s not how the terms entered computing though. We always used master in opposition of one or multiple slaves. It implies that one component has control and orders the other one around.

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          So in a git commit (since they mentioned branches)… What’s the slave? Since your the one gatekeeping the word you should know right? How come Git can’t be Master in the context they provided when there is no existence of a slave commit?

          • febra@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m not sure where you’re going with this. I haven’t gatekept anything, you can use whatever term you want, that’s none of my business. You can happily read my other comment. To me, “master” makes no sense if there are no “slaves”. That’s why I don’t use it. It doesn’t make sense to use it. You do you, that’s your business.

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              https://mastering.com/how-to-master-a-song/

              To master something, has a number of meanings that don’t require the use of “slaves”.

              https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/master

              Definitions most definitions of the word have nothing to do with slaves.

              Edit: In this case, I believe that we all treat Git the same as this definition in specific…

              : to produce a master recording of (something, such as a musical rendition)

              So just because you only know of “master” in regards to “slaves”… that doesn’t make you right.

              • febra@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Never said it made me right. Just didn’t make sense to me. You can still use whatever you like, as I do.

                • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  That’s not how the terms entered computing though. We always used master in opposition of one or multiple slaves.

                  And yet you said this… Acting like you speak for the entirety of industry, when I bring up one specific facet of our industry that isn’t using the term juxtaposition to “slaves”… but rather to other concepts of “master”, you now magically change your tune.

    • Wizzard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s where you should use something more like top / bottom /s

      I think in this sense, master is more akin to the ‘recording’ master - The best version of the recording to which others are generated, and all parts merged; no ‘slaves’ necessarily just the ‘master’.

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Same for databases, master / slave does not really describe the relationship anymore. It’s a primary, secondary, control node, read only or something else.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      4 months ago

      I look at “master” in our repo like you would refer to a master recording or a remaster, or similarly the gold master for when you could say a video game has gone gold.

      • Scrollone@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s why they used master. And this makes the whole “master is a bad word” stupid, at least in Git context.

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t know what a master recording is. Googled it and it seems to be related to vinyl or something. So yeah, kind of hard for me to wrap my head around that, but definitely an interesting outlook.

  • shneancy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    no please stop, i’m so tired of googling kinky stuff, seeing a spicy looking result and opening it just to see some computer server stuff pick something else idk maybe capitalist & worker, bonus points for political commentary

    • elephantium@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      A long time ago, in a job not so far away, I worked on a computer project where we were using Apache Jackrabbit.

      I quickly learned that I needed to search for Apache Jackrabbit and not just Jackrabbit – vibrators weren’t relevant to the project.

    • essell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Stop discriminating then, see the sexiness in the servers, the horniness in the harddrive.

  • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    4 months ago

    It only sounds bad to the fringest of the fringe that’s deceivingly loud on twitter. Good luck trying to find even one real person thinking those terms should be changed. This kind of stuff is why people vote for Trump.

    • prime_number_314159@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think very few people mind changing it, and a few people want it changed, so it’s slowly shifting across various use cases. I’ve only discussed the change from master/slave terminology with one person that affirmatively supported the change, and they didn’t know that there’s still slavery in the world today.

      I don’t know what to make of that, other than to say ending human slavery ought to be a higher priority than ending references to it.

      • shrugs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think very few people mind changing it

        I doubt that. Do you know how many system configurations depend on these keywords? Do you have any idea how many hours of work and system outages this would cause?

        • prime_number_314159@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’ve seen a few projects rename during major version upgrades, when everyone has to read the release notes and make changes, anyways.

          Plenty of old deployed systems may continue using master/slave terminology, and of course some projects will stick to that language even decades in the future, but it was once more prevalent than it is now, and that declining trend looks like it will continue.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      It was changed a while ago, it’s primary and secondary now. It’s been that way for a decade+ at this point.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not every domain though. I still see master/slave in every relevant datasheets that I read, and I’ve never seen primary/secondary in newer datasheets.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s interesting, because everything I run into now has primary/secondary or main and secondary. I’ve not seen master and slave for a good 5 years now, sure older stuff still carries it but most that new has swapped over.

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I should recheck newer datasheets, but I still see master/slave nomenclature in STM32 doc and tools for example.

    • CluckN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      The place I’m at changed all of its documentation to student/teacher instead of master/slave.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’d like it to be changed because I don’t like saying "is the slave working? Did you check? To my black employees.

          • maniii@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Harder R if you want the SlaveR to whip the SlaveE :'D

            Also just kidding. I really really dont understand a lot of the sensitivity and sentiment against words. Words are NOT Violence as long as you agree to be civil and not militant.

            • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              It’s not obvious to realize this, but the luxury of thinking words are neutral is a privilege.

              Think of it this way. If 5% of the time, when a person said “howdy”, they punched you in the face. You would be very wary of anyone saying howdy. Just in case. Now imagine having to live on edge like that 24/7. It wears you down. It’s exhausting.

              Well, it costs me nothing to choose a different word besides howdy. And for that cost of $0 I can make someone else’s life less anxious. I know how much anxiety sucks because I’m basically made out of it. So I’m going to do what I can to put other people at ease.

              Now obviously black people know that the IT term master and slave are not about them. But they are also conditioned by society that, some small % of the time when those words come up, things go very poorly for them. So yeah, I would be twitchy about it too. Even if my rational mind knew it was silly.

      • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        To be honest I’d feel stupid saying that alout at anyone. They’re not called that in my native language - I think.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The i2c spec–which is officially controlled by NXP–explicitly made the change in 2021:

      https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/user-guide/UM10204.pdf

      Updated the terms “master/slave” to “controller/target” throughout to align with MIPI I3C specification and NXP’s Inclusive Language Project

      Yes, this has gotten real traction.

    • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      There is real, actual, injustice in the world that we need to address. Computer terms are not one of them.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        But if I have the power to make a small change at work to both be more accurate and correct a minor injustice, why the heck not?! I can’t fix world hunger, but I can at least start a discussion about changing some internal terminology

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    well, i didn’t know that computer hardware could be consenting and engaged with with the BDSM community at large.

    Personally i just like master/slave because it’s really fucking obvious how things are supposed to work. Outside of that there are some more specific terminologies that work better in specific applications. Leader follower is pretty cringe, but mostly gets the point across. Main and sub is already established lingo in the electrical field from what i understand.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 months ago

    I remember back in the late 90s being in college. I brought my girlfriend to class one day. She raised her hand after the professer was explaining Master/Slave roles. Keep in mind, I’m white. She’s black. She’s not enrolle

    d in this class AT ALL.

    So the professer sees this, and says “Yes, you there, girl I’ve never seen in 4 months of this class”

    And all she said was “Master and Slave drives? That sounds sexy!”

    The whole class facepalmed.