On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Toni Menzel <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 on artifact and feature, too. > > And the oddest of all terms to me was "license", which i agree with Carsten, > distribution kind of makes sense to me in this context. A "assembly" to me > is more generic and does not tell that we assign a "target" already. > Distribution tells that we not "assemble" something but "distribute" > something.
+1 regards, Karl > hope this was not too confusing ? > > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Carsten Ziegeler > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Ok, so far I think we "agreed" to use artifact and feature. >> >> So the final term is "license" :) >> As suggestions we have "product", "distribution", "configuration", >> "assembly", "composition" (hope I did not overlook a proposal) >> >> The most neutral term would be "assembly", I guess. I personally like >> "distribution" in this context a little bit more, but "assembly" would >> be fine as well :) >> >> WDYT? >> >> Carsten >> -- >> Carsten Ziegeler >> [email protected] >> > > > > -- > Toni Menzel > Independent Software Developer > Professional Profile: http://okidokiteam.com > [email protected] > http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open > Participation Software. > -- Karl Pauls [email protected]
