Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[ALL] - We need to be more consistent on "compliant" vs "conformant" #988

Closed
tomkivlin opened this issue Jan 30, 2020 · 10 comments · Fixed by #1190
Closed

[ALL] - We need to be more consistent on "compliant" vs "conformant" #988

tomkivlin opened this issue Jan 30, 2020 · 10 comments · Fixed by #1190
Assignees
@rabi-abdel
Labels
Archive Archive Item
Projects
RM

Comments

@tomkivlin
Copy link
Collaborator

From deep dive in Prague:
We need to be more consistent on "compliant" vs "conformant"
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To do in old-RA2 via automation Jan 30, 2020
@project-bot project-bot bot moved this from To do to Backlog in old-RA2 Jan 30, 2020
@michaelfix
Copy link
Collaborator

@tomkivlin (Tom), thanks for opening this issue. The RI/RC WSs will avoid duplication and use this issue to document the conversation & disposition, then apply the outcome across our documents, and presumably updates to our WS titles, and general decks/messaging. Per the Gov call today Brian B. will be reaching across to Heather to collect their (LFN) feedback, then we can ensure we have consensus on definition, and application of that definition.

@tomkivlin tomkivlin removed the Backlog label Feb 17, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to the M3 milestone Feb 17, 2020
@project-bot project-bot bot moved this from Backlog to To do in old-RA2 Feb 17, 2020
@gkunz
Copy link
Collaborator

gkunz commented Feb 24, 2020

Has there been any conclusion in the meantime regarding official terminology we should follow?

@tomkivlin
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@rabi-abdel did you say on a call last week that "conformance" / "conformant" was the chosen term? If we can point to a meeting decision, or even better some published content then we could start raising PRs across all RM/RA/RI/RC workstreams.

@tomkivlin tomkivlin changed the title [RA2 ALL] - We need to be more consistent on "compliant" vs "conformant" [ALL] - We need to be more consistent on "compliant" vs "conformant" Feb 25, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To do in RC1 via automation Feb 25, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To Do in RI1 via automation Feb 25, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To do in RA1 via automation Feb 25, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To do in RM via automation Feb 25, 2020
@tomkivlin tomkivlin added this to To do in RI2 via automation Feb 25, 2020
@rabi-abdel
Copy link
Collaborator

@tomkivlin yes, the decision is to use Conformance/Conformant.
https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=30605664

@trevgc trevgc mentioned this issue Feb 27, 2020
Closed
@kedmison kedmison mentioned this issue Feb 27, 2020
Closed
CsatariGergely added a commit to nokia/CNTT that referenced this issue Feb 28, 2020
@CsatariGergely
[RM Ch01, Ch08]: Compliance to conformance
5ab7f54 
Fixes the RM part of anuket-project#988

Signed-off-by: Gergely Csatari <gergely.csatari@nokia.com>
@CsatariGergely CsatariGergely mentioned this issue Feb 28, 2020
Merged
kedmison pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 1, 2020
@CsatariGergely
[RM Ch01, Ch08]: Compliance to conformance (#1208)
af36246 
Fixes the RM part of #988

Signed-off-by: Gergely Csatari <gergely.csatari@nokia.com>
@kedmison kedmison mentioned this issue Mar 5, 2020
Closed
@michaelfix
Copy link
Collaborator

@tomkivlin ,

There is a similar RC-1 issue, #1056 .

Therefore, I did some research, and generated a PR #1283 to clarify Conformance for the use of RC-1. It's a short, abbreviated definition.

The more detailed notes and background are in my RC-1 issue #1056.

Please review the PR #1283 and feel free to edit/comment after looking at the notes/research I put in the issue.

pgoyal01 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 12, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch01] Language Fixes
fd2cfb3 
1. Change Compliant to Conformant (Issue #988)
2. Changed language of 1.1 and 1.3
@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 mentioned this issue Mar 12, 2020
Merged
pgoyal01 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 12, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 C03] Language edits
79680af 
1. replace "compliance" and "compliant" with "conformance" and "conformant" (Issue #988)
2. Edit some language to make it clearer and concise.
@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 mentioned this issue Mar 12, 2020
Merged
pgoyal01 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 12, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch04] compliant/conformant
919fdb7 
Changed title of 4.2.3.3 to say "conformant" (Issue #988)
@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 mentioned this issue Mar 12, 2020
Merged
pgoyal01 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 12, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch05] conformance/compliance
6eb4b40 
Edit 5.1 to change "conformance" to "compliance" (Issue #988). Some minor language edits.
@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 mentioned this issue Mar 12, 2020
Merged
@pgoyal01
Copy link
Collaborator

RA-1 edits made in Chapter 01 (PR #1298), Chapter 03 (PR #1299), Chapter 04 (PR #1300) and Chapter 05 (PR #1301). No edits required in other chapters.

rabiabdel pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 13, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch04] compliant/conformant (#1300)
4903f5d 
Changed title of 4.2.3.3 to say "conformant" (Issue #988)
rabiabdel pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 16, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 C03] Language edits (#1299)
9f9f055 
* [RA-1 C03] Language edits

1. replace "compliance" and "compliant" with "conformance" and "conformant" (Issue #988)
2. Edit some language to make it clearer and concise.

* [RA-1 Ch03] "Compliant"

Delete "The following diagram shows the core OpenStack services that must be provided to be compliant." as part of it is repeat of previous paragraph; introduce conformance in the previous paragraph.
rabiabdel pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 16, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch05] conformance/compliance (#1301)
18c22c5 
Edit 5.1 to change "conformance" to "compliance" (Issue #988). Some minor language edits.
@tomkivlin tomkivlin removed this from To do in RI2 Mar 18, 2020
rabiabdel pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2020
@pgoyal01
[RA-1 Ch01] Language Fixes (#1298)
2ea69fd 
* [RA-1 Ch01] Language Fixes

1. Change Compliant to Conformant (Issue #988)
2. Changed language of 1.1 and 1.3

* [RA-1 Ch01] Minor edits

Requires "Abbreviations" chapter (non existent) to be labeled "Terminology."

* [RA-1 TOC] Terminology

Issue #1309 
Still need to create the chapter and content
@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 removed this from To do in RA1 Mar 23, 2020
@jayacha
Copy link
Collaborator

jayacha commented Apr 14, 2020

RI/RC were done via issue 1056 & PR 1283 (Both closed)

@jayacha jayacha removed this from To do in RC1 Apr 14, 2020
@jayacha jayacha removed this from To Do in RI1 Apr 14, 2020
RM automation moved this from To do to Done Apr 29, 2020
@rabi-abdel rabi-abdel added the Archive Archive Item label May 15, 2020
@project-bot project-bot bot moved this from Done to Achieve in RM May 15, 2020
@rabi-abdel rabi-abdel removed this from the M3 (Freeze Contributions) milestone May 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@rabi-abdel rabi-abdel

Labels
Archive Archive Item
Projects
RM
  
Achieve
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

[RA2 Ch0x] More consistent use of conformance vs compliance in RA2 gkunz/CNTT
7 participants
@kedmison @michaelfix @gkunz @rabi-abdel @pgoyal01 @tomkivlin @jayacha