search

tmate-io / tmate-ssh-server

tmate SSH server
https://tmate.io
Other
626 stars 146 forks source link

Rename? #41

Closed rugk closed 5 years ago

rugk commented 6 years ago

I know it's common jargon, but I still think the term "slave" should not be used and is not appropriate.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Terminology_concerns for details and how other (big) companies do it/name their products.

nviennot commented 6 years ago

It should be renamed to "replica", I haven't had time to do it

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018, 14:11 rugk notifications@github.com wrote:

I know it's common jargo0n, but I still think the term "slave" should not be used and is not appropriate.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)#Terminology_concerns for details and how other (big) companies do it/name their products.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/tmate-io/tmate-slave/issues/41, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AASIZHRxaM6vXTtXWIbIFwjL_QF2Uwglks5uH3pdgaJpZM4VVEIw .

grzm commented 6 years ago

Why not server? That's the language used elsewhere in the README:

tmate server side

tmate-slave is the server side part of tmate.io.

Seems tmate-server would be a natural choice.

varac commented 6 years ago

I also like tmate-server the most.

df7cb commented 5 years ago

I'd also suggest renaming it to tmate-server. Afaict there's nothing slave-ish in the way it works, both tmate instances and plain ssh clients connect to it, so "server" seems just fine.

We are pondering uploading this to Debian, and we'd better get the name right before that.

nviennot commented 5 years ago

I agree. I'm going to change the name this week.

This month, I'm going to spend time on renaming all the projects and making docker images. The infrastructure needs a rehaul.

Because tmux has a server/client architecture already, it might be confusing to reuse the name "server". (both the tmate-server and tmate-client have runs a tmux server).

On the design architecture diagram, I ended up renaming tmate-slave to "replica":

image

Does tmate-replica make sense?, or we should stick to tmate-server?

df7cb commented 5 years ago

I'd say "server" and "replica" only make sense from a tmux perspective (the contents of terminal on the server host are replicated to the replica host). When looking at the whole setup from an end user perspective, the thing running on the target host is a client that connects to a server running elsewhere in the internet.

rugk commented 5 years ago

Why not something like "local client" and "local server" on the client vs "remote server", "remote client" etc? In such a case the "browser" would e.g. also be a "local client" (that happens to be a "HTML5 participant", as you call it.).

nviennot commented 5 years ago

I think the name tmate-ssh-server makes sense from both a user perspective, and an architecture perspective. Its role is twofold: 1) provide authentication, and confidentiality to the tmate client and 2) provide sessions to SSH clients. If we were to only use HTTP clients, we could bypass this ssh server and go straight to the proxy (which could be renamed to tmate-websockets)