[OT] master/slave debate in Python

[Ian Kelly]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 2:01 AM David Palao <dpalao.python at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> My opinion is that the terms "master/slave" describe well some situations.
> They could be seen by some people as offensive (although unfortunately
> sometimes true, even today) when applied to persons. But it is not
> offensive when applied to processes in a computer. They are not living
> entities.
>
> I would say that when talking about programming, the terms have a
> perfect meaning.

Care to give an example? The distinctive part of the definition of
"slave" is that it refers to someone who is owned and/or held captive,
and forced to work against their will. I can think of no situation in
programming in which the word is particularly apt, because the trait
of "lack of freedom" is just not something that comes up. There is
always a word choice available that is not only more sensitive, but
more accurate as well.

> Otherwise, what is the correct way to use the words
> master and slave? Not using them?

That would be my recommendation. Instead you could use "primary /
replica" or "primary / secondary" or "manager / subordinate" or
"client / agent" or whatever other word pair is appropriate for the
particular situation.