Replacing master/slave terminology

2020-06-10 Thread Nate Coraor
Hi all, I'd like to propose that an effort be made to replace master/slave terminology in MIT and Heimdal implementations at some future milestone. I suspect this would be a fairly large undertaking, but hopefully it could be done incrementally and in a largely backwards compatible way. For exampl

Re: Replacing master/slave terminology

2020-06-10 Thread Nate Coraor
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 5:04 PM Greg Hudson wrote: > MIT krb5 switched to using "replica" for non-primary KDCs as of release > 1.17. This was an easy change technically, as the old term was only > used in a user-visible way in documentation and in the name of one > profile relation. The pull re

Re: Replacing master/slave terminology

2020-06-11 Thread Nate Coraor
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:01 PM Jeffrey Altman wrote: > For Heimdal, the term "slave" is part of the both the iprop process name > and command line switches for the iprop_master. Changing these could > adversely impact end user deployments that are not expecting their > configuration scripts and