> Viktor's explanation of how "master" in contexts w/o "slave" can't be
offesnive needs to be addressed. Really, asserting that "master secret"
is problematic is simply credibility-destroying.
My memory is highly imperfect, and I did not go back to the archives and re-read this thread, but I don't recall those advocating for changes saying 'master secret,' for example, had to be changed. If I'm wrong about that, please post link to email discussion here. I don't care about what other organizations are doing about that, so let's stay on-topic.
At any rate, I don't think terms like that need to be changed. If, however, it turns out that solitary use of the word master is exclusionary, then I have no problem with advocating for another word. We have many, and it costs nothing to be kind to potential collaborators.
Is my credibility with you restored now? (Based on postings at, say, openssl-users, I doubt it. :)
