Jesus M. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 09:20:07PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 21:09 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 19:29 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
Hi,
What do y'all thing about swapping the meaning of 'client' and 'server'
back to what most people expect? The way func uses those labels now
only makes sense to rabid xwindows developers. This is (IMNSHO) likely
to cause more confusion and Pain the further along development goes.
I'll volunteer to do said cleanup work if y'all agree it should be done.
how about referring to it as master/node?
Fine with me, assuming that's the terminology we decided to go with. I
vaguely remember a terminology discussion awhile back, but not the
result.
master/node?
or overlord/minion, maybe
+1 :) I like neat names like this. Boring names like server/client,
master/node are rather "enterprisey". Overloard and minion are cool.
master/node. Also, in an environment that relies heavily on
virtualization I've stopped using the term 'server' in favor of 'host'
unless I'm talking about the physical hardware. 2 cents.
-Mike
