This Bugzilla instance is deprecated, and most Eclipse projects now use GitHub or Eclipse GitLab. Please see the deprecation plan for details.
Bug 270836 - Update RTx name to FRC
Summary: Update RTx name to FRC
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: z_Archived
Classification: Eclipse Foundation
Component: Cosmos (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Mark W Johnson CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-04-01 12:53 EDT by David Whiteman CLA
Modified: 2012-01-03 13:55 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description David Whiteman CLA 2009-04-01 12:53:33 EDT
It was decided on the 3/23/09 COSMOS architecture call to rename the Reconciliation Taxonomy (RTx) to Federation and Reconciliation Catalog (FRC).  

http://wiki.eclipse.org/Cosmos_Architecture_Meeting_24-March-09

It was apparent that the Reconciliation Taxonomy name has led to confusion. Early adopters expected something other than what was intended. Taxonomy implies a detailed classification system. Marv Waschke from CA suggested that Federation and Reconciliation Catalog (FRC) would be a more accurate name. 

All documentation in CVS and on the wiki will need to be updated.  Here's the wiki page:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/COSMOS_Reconciliation_Taxonomy

Once the content is changed, David can perform a page rename.

As part of this activity, a blog entry will be made to announce the change.

To keep activity related to FRC granular and iterative, a separate bug will be created for editorial changes desired by CA.
Comment 1 David Whiteman CLA 2009-06-29 18:32:49 EDT
Mark, do you suggest we mark this as WONTFIX or LATER?  It sounds like you aren't planning to make this name change anytime soon, if at all.
Comment 2 Mark W Johnson CLA 2009-06-30 14:21:37 EDT
(In reply to comment #1)
> Mark, do you suggest we mark this as WONTFIX or LATER?  It sounds like you
> aren't planning to make this name change anytime soon, if at all.
> 

I have no plans to make a change soon. Based on further feedback, the rename may not be such a good idea after all. I'd like guidance on whether WONTFIX or LATER would be more appropriate, and whether the Target Milestone should be changed from 1.1_i6 to future. 
Comment 3 David Whiteman CLA 2009-06-30 23:47:22 EDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> I have no plans to make a change soon. Based on further feedback, the rename
> may not be such a good idea after all. I'd like guidance on whether WONTFIX or
> LATER would be more appropriate, and whether the Target Milestone should be
> changed from 1.1_i6 to future. 

WONTFIX means the problem described is a bug which will never be fixed.  LATER means it will be fixed in a future release.  LATER is considered obsolete however, so we would instead leave it open in that case and use a target milestone of "future".  If you feel confident this is something we don't plan to change, then we can choose WONTFIX.  The defect can be reopened if we absolutely need to - this is a reversible procedure. :-)