Re: [Acme] Application -> order

On 11/14/2016 11:50 PM, Richard Barnes wrote: > While we're at it, the bikeshed I've been caching is "registration" -> > "account". Seems like normal people think of "registration" as > something you do once, and an "account" as the thing it creates. > That's why we refer to an "account key",

Re: [Acme] Application -> order

Changing both "application" -> "order" and "registration" -> "account" actually would be very welcome changes, as those are more familiar terms, imo... but the changes are definitely bikesheds. On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 4:50 PM Richard Barnes wrote: > I really don't care. If people

Re: [Acme] Application -> order

I really don't care. If people like "order", we can do a global search and replace, and hope the RFC Editor will catch the ones we miss. While we're at it, the bikeshed I've been caching is "registration" -> "account". Seems like normal people think of "registration" as something you do once,

Re: [Acme] Application -> order

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been putting off this conversation because it is doomed to become a > bikeshed, but I am proposing to rename Applications to Orders. > > So, I have to thoroughly agree that this is a bikeshed. > The

[Acme] Application -> order

Hi all, I've been putting off this conversation because it is doomed to become a bikeshed, but I am proposing to rename Applications to Orders. The reason: ACME is intended, among other things, to simplify the certificate issuance and deployment process. That includes being accessible to people