Re: [Pki-devel] Request for better Dogtag 10 terminology . . .
On 05/11/2012 07:08 AM, John Dennis wrote:
--
/kashyap
On 05/10/2012 08:02 PM, Matthew Harmsen wrote:
> As initially stated, we would like to replace the *"[instance]"*
> notation and *"PKI instance"* terminology currently used within
> Dogtag 10 with something that is more descriptive and more accurate.
> While several alternatives have already been suggested, none have
> gained wide-spread acceptance:
Actually I think the term "instance" is descriptive and accurate, it makes
perfect sense
to me in the context of how it's being used.
Agreed.
Terms like cluster, domain, realm, group,
etc. have so many other connotations I think it would be more
confusing because it implies
something it's not.
True, from a QE perspective, it's easier to refer it as pki(ca, etc,) instance while
communicating to debug an issue. Also, the terms you mentioned are really over used in
general, and in other projects. Not to mention, the word realm also being used in
kerberos, 'group' being a standard *nix term, domain(again, a very vague term).