Phillip Susi wrote: > > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote: > >> From: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > >> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > >> @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ If you like, you can put extra tags at the end: > >> . `Acked-by:` says that the person who is more familiar with the area > >> the patch attempts to modify liked the patch. > >> . `Reviewed-by:`, unlike the other tags, can only be offered by the > >> - reviewer and means that she is completely satisfied that the patch > >> + reviewer and means that they are completely satisfied that the patch > > Say wait a minute. If that is a "singular they", then why was the "is" > changed to "are"? Great point. I doubt any linguist would be happy with: can only be offered by the reviewer and means that they is completely satisfied... Unless we are in the context of African-American Vernacular English. > I think that belies the fact that there is no such thing as a > "singular they". There is such a thing as singular they, but it's not what the proponents of this patch think [1]: This is a good use of singular they: Everyone returned to their seats This isn't: We thank the anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments Cheers. [1] https://ahdictionary.tumblr.com/post/147597257733/updated-usage-note-they -- Felipe Contreras
