Container/ConfigSet interface nomenclature is confusing

Anything about Configsets is left over from when we first started. In 1.x the entity is called a container, we had added "tag" as a prefix but maybe that was lost. It was really hard to think of a label for these. We also had to keep the existing entity type ID for migration purposes.

Yeah, I didn't offer much of a solution because it was hard to come up with something better. I think mostly I was just lost and couldn't piece together how to use it and the mix of terms made it more confusing if that makes sense.

MR fixes some wording, I left a comment on better explaining the advanced use case which enables multiple tag containers.

Looks great

Merged! Hopefully this helps

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.