“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.
It’s all Latex’s fault :'(
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
It’s pronounced “latek”