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

+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

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

+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

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

+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'. >

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

> 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

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

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

[Pulp-dev] Terms: unassociate vs. disassociate

During the last pulp3 MVP review, a terminology question was raised regarding "associating" content with a repository. And more specifically "unassociating" vs "disassociate" content. I took an action item to define those terms in the Glossary section of the MVP wiki[1] which I did. I added