Re: "vendor branch"

[Don Bockenfeld/FVI]

Here are some alternate terms for "vendor" that attempt to capture
what I perceive the intent to be.  I'm deliberately sidestepping the
question of whether a change is called for.

third-party, supplier, [whoops, gotta go!]

Richard Stallman wrote:
>I suspected it was something like that.  The problem
>with this terminology is the assumption that the original
>version of the program came to you from a "vendor".  That
>assumption essentially denies the existence of organizations
>such as the FSF, or the CVS developers likewise, which develop
>software but are not vendors.
>
>Ten years ago I convinced the POSIX committee to get rid of
>certain statements which assumed every system has a "vendor".
>Can we replace "vendor" in CVS with some other term that
>doesn't make that assumption?  Perhaps "original" version?