Hi Shourya, On 27 May 2020 21:50:48 GMT+05:30, Shourya Shukla <shouryashukla.oo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Hello, > >This is the third installation of my GSoC blog covering week 3 >https://shouryashukla.blogspot.com/2020/05/gsoc-week-3.html > >All feedbacks and suggestions are welcome! :) I'll mention a couple of things that came to me after re-reading the blog. The blog reads: > And the final one, comments should be not confusing. to solve the 1st issue in v3, I put up a comment which was: > > The `quiet` option is present for backward compatibility but is currently not used. > > Do I even need to explain how ambiguous this is (something which took me one whole patch to realise)? While you don't have to explain the ambiguity for someone who has read the review discussion, it is possible that someone who has not read Junio's e-mail[1] might not understand what ambiguity is present in that comment. So, it would've been nice if you had explained the ambiguity. Another thing, you thank Junio for the updated comment (which is nice). But it's not clear from the blog how Junio contributed to that comment. This could've been avoided by adding more information about the context which in this case is (again) Junio's e-mail about the ambiguous comment. Things to keep in mind for future blogs :) --- Footnotes: [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqk115ruux.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ -- Sivaraam Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity and possible "typso".
