subversion-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpil...@collab.net>
Subject Re: svn commit: r957751 - /subversion/site/publish/packages.html
Date Fri, 25 Jun 2010 19:12:11 GMT
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 14:31, Mark Phippard <markphip@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The distinction we make internally at CollabNet over when we use the
>> term certified on our binaries is the process they go through before
>> posting.
>>
>> ...explanation...
> 
> Thanks for that explanation. It helps below:
> 
>> ...
>> I was fine with your wording change, and I am also fine with Julian's
>> corrections.  If you think his changes are confusing I have no
>> objection to removing those changes.  FWIW, I do think Julian's
>> wording makes it plainly clear that the certification is coming from
>> the company and not the Subversion project.
> 
> I do think his wording is better than before my changes, but as I
> mentioned: any use of the word "certify" implies some kind of
> authority. Thus, the use implies somebody is reviewing and approving
> the process of creating those binaries.

Is "qualified" a more appropriate word for this purpose?

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand


Mime
View raw message