#536 Packaging:SSLCertificateHandling wording improvements
Closed: Fixed None Opened 4 years ago by ppisar.

I think two phrases in the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SSLCertificateHandling documents could be improved:

The https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SSLCertificateHandling#X.509_.2F_SSL_certificates section reads ''In this draft, we are''. The document is not draft anymore. Please remove the ''In this draft'' words.

The https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SSLCertificateHandling#PKCS.2311_Providers section reads ''Packages providing PKCS!#11 modules SHOULD also provide a corresponding module file''. The twice used word ''module'' denotes two different things. That's confusing. The first one is a shared library, the second one is a textual configuration file. And they are located in different directories. I recommend to make the sentece less ambigious like ''Packages providing PKCS!#11 module DSO file SHOULD also provide a corresponding module configuration file''.


These seem OK to me, but I'll CC the actual author of the guideline in question. If he's OK with the changes then I'll go ahead and make them.

Looks good to me; thanks. Perhaps 'module configuration file' could be a link to appropriate p11-kit documentation?

Looks like a trivial fix then.

Metadata Update from @james:
- Issue assigned to tibbs

2 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata