"Third party" software - a clear term?

[Kyle Nitzsche]

Hi Matthew,

I created bug 420672 and made a bzr branch with the code changes as a 
proposed fix.

If accepted, there will be follow-on doc (and translation) changes.

Cheers,
Kyle


Matthew East wrote:
> 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.
>
>