[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-dev
Subject:    Re: Removing non-inclusive terminology
From:       Matt Pavlovich <mattrpav () gmail ! com>
Date:       2022-04-29 20:41:20
Message-ID: 1DA08312-7403-4EA3-ADE8-B91B00BDD570 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hey Lucas,

I think this is a good time to start working in these changes as work starts on \
5.18.0.

My thoughts:

Pav-1. This is a widely used url, we should take care to transition users. I suggest \
add this new handler and deprecate masterslave. 

Pav-2. IMHO 'leaderfollower' is incorrect terminology— in this use case, it really \
is just a ‘failover' behavior and there is no relation to the architecture of the \
target broker(s).

Thanks,
Matt Pavlovich

> On Apr 29, 2022, at 1:08 PM, Tetreault, Lucas <tetlucas@amazon.com.INVALID> wrote:
> 
> Hey folks, 
> 
> TLDR; 
> I am submitting a PR to rename the "masterslave" network connector transport to \
> "leaderfollower" and I propose that we use leader/follower going forward to replace \
> all references to master/slave. 
> The Long Version: 
> A tweet from a few days ago [1] raised the issue of non-inclusive terminology in \
> the AWS docs [2] and suggested that we should replace masterslave with a more \
> inclusive name for the network connector transport. The AWS docs refer to a feature \
> of ActiveMQ that is a convenience discovery agent: \
> https://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers#masterslave-discovery. We are \
> planning to change the docs to remove the recommendation to use the masterslave \
> transport.  
> Replacing master/slave nomenclature in ActiveMQ was raised in July 2020 [3]. There \
> was some initial work to rename the git branch from master to main and there have \
> been some attempts at making some changes to the code \
> (https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/679, \
> https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/714, \
> https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/788) however we have not been able to come \
> to an agreement on nomenclature so these efforts seem to have stalled out. 
> If we are able to come to an agreement on nomenclature, we can move forward with \
> removing more non-inclusive terminology on the website (I will follow up with some \
> PRs to the website), in discussions with the community and of course in the \
> codebase. This will remove barriers to adoption and make ActiveMQ a more \
> approachable and inclusive project for everyone! Other Apache projects such as Solr \
> and Kafka have moved from master/slave to leader/follower. Leader/follower is also \
> recommended by the IETF [4] and inclusivenaming.org [5] which is supported by \
> companies such as Cisco, Intel, and RedHat. At AWS, we have used active/standby to \
> describe HA deployments, however from previous discussions it's clear that \
> active/standby is not a viable option for this community since 'active' can be used \
> to describe so many things. If we can agree on leader/follower or some alternate we \
> would follow the community's preference and adopt leader/follower to better serve \
> our ActiveMQ users.  
> If we can't come to an agreement on Leader/Follower or some other nomenclature I \
> will, at the very least, create a follow up PR to remove the masterslave transport \
> since it is just a convenience method to use static+failover with \
> ?randomize=false&maxReconnectAttempts=0. 
> [1] https://twitter.com/owenblacker/status/1517156221207212032
> [2] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazon-mq/latest/developer-guide/amazon-mq-creating- \
> configuring-network-of-brokers.html#creating-configuring-network-of-brokers-configure-network-connectors \
>  [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-7514 
> [4] https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-02.html 
> [5] https://inclusivenaming.org/word-lists/tier-1/ 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lucas Tétreault
> Software Development Manager, Amazon MQ
> email: tetlucas@amazon.com 
> 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]