Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 14:06:25 +1000 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Benjamin Kaduk <bjk@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org, svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r386873 - head/security/ca_root_nss/files Message-ID: <555D59C1.1020301@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1505202354130.22210@multics.mit.edu> References: <201505201808.t4KI8ajp012568@svn.freebsd.org> <555D4216.5060303@FreeBSD.org> <555D5504.3030106@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1505202354130.22210@multics.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21/05/2015 1:58 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Wed, 20 May 2015, Bryan Drewery wrote: > >> On 5/20/15 9:25 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote: >>> On 21/05/2015 4:08 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: >>>> Author: bjk (doc committer) >>>> Date: Wed May 20 18:08:35 2015 >>>> New Revision: 386873 >>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/386873 >>>> >>>> Log: >>>> Fix spelling of "certification authority" >>>> >>>> Approved by: portmgr (bapt), bapt (ports committer) >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> head/security/ca_root_nss/files/pkg-message.in >>>> >>> >>>> -FreeBSD does not, and can not warrant that the certificate authorities >>>> +FreeBSD does not, and can not warrant that the certification authorities >>>> whose certificates are included in this package have in any way been >>>> audited for trustworthiness or RFC 3647 compliance. > This pkg-message is in the context of the Web PKI, and TLS. TLS is an > IETF standard; IETF documents are published as RFCs, the official > repository of which is hosted by the RFC Editor. > > The RFC Editor maintains a list of expansions of abbreviations: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt Today I learned. Awesome. > In this context, I believe it is quite unambiguous that CA expands to > "certification authority", and a great deal of traffic on the IETF mailing > lists supports the lack of ambiguity. Agreed. > Apparently there is ambiguity in the minds of others (yourselves), though; > it probably would have been better to have this discussion prior to the > commit. I can revert it during the discussion, if you wish. There was, it's just (way) less ambiguous and evidenced now :) No revert necessary, I just wanted to declare the original intent. The abbreviation expansion link would have been great in the commit log (prior conversation or otherwise). Thanks for teaching me something! :) > -Ben >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?555D59C1.1020301>