“master” in version control has no corresponding “slave,” but nevertheless the “master/slave” terminology is the reason why GitHub switched to “main” and everyone else followed suit
I know I’m old, but never found that calling a dumb machine a slave to be problemtic. The thing is supposed to obey my orders. It’s in the code and code is law.
LaTeX … Master-Slave …
“Dammit, for some reason I can’t kill all the children, a few of them always survive, I must have a leak somewhere”
They respawn or become zombies.
I think that’s why we’re supposed to call it main now
“master” in version control has no corresponding “slave,” but nevertheless the “master/slave” terminology is the reason why GitHub switched to “main” and everyone else followed suit
The naming isn’t great still… I usually use ReadWrite instance and replica. I really wish we had some more concise replacement terms.
Main is the replacement for master for git branches, not the general master-slave pattern. Wikipedia suggests:
I usually use controller / worker if it’s a local process or controller / remote if the subordinates are on different hosts.
I know I’m old, but never found that calling a dumb machine a slave to be problemtic. The thing is supposed to obey my orders. It’s in the code and code is law.
I’m also not American and never owned slaves.