Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1282008
Clarify language when referring to non-RH packages
Last modified: 2017-09-14 08:10:51 EDT
Description of problem
Use of "Non-RH signed" term when referring to "user's packages" may
In particular, "Non-RH signed" may be understood as referring to packages
that are signed, but not by Red Hat. But in fact, we don't make any
distinction between packages signed by other authorities or not signed
at all; this term may create impression that there is such distinction.
Version-Release number of selected component
Other term that has been mentioned and is sometimes used in same context
is are "3rd party packages". IMHO this is better, but still may sound a
bit awkward in some situations, in particular if the packages are owned
solely by customer: there is no 3rd party (just us and them).
My suggestion is to use very simple language here, such as "foreign" or
"non-RH" packages. The important distinction here is that the packages
are not already "covered" by Red Hat so someone should take a look.