Re: [Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

[Austin Macdonald]

+1 add/remove

It sounds like we are arriving at this language:

content units are created and deleted
content units can be added to and removed from repositories

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Brian Bouterse 
wrote:

> +1 to using remove and not delete. Delete to me implies the deletion of
> the content versus removing it from the repo.
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Ina Panova  wrote:
>
>> +1 for add/remove. An aside note, i want to make sure we stick to
>> 'remove' specifically' and not 'delete'.
>> I wanted to bring this up, since these 2 terms are quite similar but
>> still feels different.
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ina Panova
>> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>
>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>
>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Brian Bouterse 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to the "adding ..." and "removing ..." terminology. I think it will
>>> be more clear for users.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Audet  wrote:
>>>
 > As an end-user I agree with the add/remove lexicon being more clear
 to users, if not more technically accurate.

 Same. Either phrasing gets the message across, but IMO, "add content to
 a repository" is more unambiguous.

 ___
 Pulp-dev mailing list
 Pulp-dev@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

[Brian Bouterse]

+1 to using remove and not delete. Delete to me implies the deletion of the
content versus removing it from the repo.

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Ina Panova  wrote:

> +1 for add/remove. An aside note, i want to make sure we stick to 'remove'
> specifically' and not 'delete'.
> I wanted to bring this up, since these 2 terms are quite similar but still
> feels different.
>
>
>
> 
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Brian Bouterse 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to the "adding ..." and "removing ..." terminology. I think it will be
>> more clear for users.
>>
>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Audet  wrote:
>>
>>> > As an end-user I agree with the add/remove lexicon being more clear to
>>> users, if not more technically accurate.
>>>
>>> Same. Either phrasing gets the message across, but IMO, "add content to
>>> a repository" is more unambiguous.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

[Daniel Alley]

+1

Add/remove is definitely more clear.  Associate/disassociate feels like
more of an engineering terminology.

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Ina Panova  wrote:

> +1 for add/remove. An aside note, i want to make sure we stick to 'remove'
> specifically' and not 'delete'.
> I wanted to bring this up, since these 2 terms are quite similar but still
> feels different.
>
>
>
> 
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Brian Bouterse 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to the "adding ..." and "removing ..." terminology. I think it will be
>> more clear for users.
>>
>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jeremy Audet  wrote:
>>
>>> > As an end-user I agree with the add/remove lexicon being more clear to
>>> users, if not more technically accurate.
>>>
>>> Same. Either phrasing gets the message across, but IMO, "add content to
>>> a repository" is more unambiguous.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

[Jeremy Audet]

> As an end-user I agree with the add/remove lexicon being more clear to
users, if not more technically accurate.

Same. Either phrasing gets the message across, but IMO, "add content to a
repository" is more unambiguous.
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

[Michael Hrivnak]

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Jeff Ortel  wrote:

> "Associate" replaced with "Add content to a repository".
>
> and
>
> "Unassociate"|"Disassociate" replaced with "Removing content from a
> repository".
>

Love it. That also happens to match the terminology I naturally started
using with versioned repos of tracking the version where a piece of content
was added and removed.


-- 

Michael Hrivnak

Principal Software Engineer, RHCE

Red Hat
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev