"Third party" software - a clear term?

[Matthew East]

Hi Kyle,

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Kyle
Nitzsche<kyle.nitzsche at canonical.com> wrote:
> This term may make one wonder: who is the "first party"? And who, the
> "second party"? If the answers to these questions are not immediately
> clear to the user, then I would propose the term "third party" itself
> should be reconsidered.
>
> Perhaps simply calling it (in SW and docs) "Other" might be clearer to
> users?

I see your point, but I think this is something to raise with the
people who design Ubuntu's desktop. The documentation will generally
strive to follow naming conventions used by the desktop because
otherwise it will get even more confusing for the users. If the
current naming convention used in the software sources application is
"Third-Party Sources", then the documentation will almost certainly
follow that until it is changed. On that basis I'd suggest that you
approach the Ubuntu desktop team to discuss how best to describe this
software.

-- 
Matthew East
http://www.mdke.org
gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF