On 09/25/14 12:12, Frans Klaver wrote: > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 06:28:47PM +0200, Oscar Utbult wrote: >> On 2014-09-25 16:48, Frans Klaver wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 3:41 PM, <oscar@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] Changed "&" with "and" in >>>> Documentation/applying-patches.txt. >>> >>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches says: >>> >>> Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz" >>> instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy >>> to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change >>> its behaviour. >> >> Thank you for your feedback Frans. >> >> So for example a better description would have been: "use 'and' instead >> of '&'"? > > Yes. It is useful to still mention it is affecting documentation only > though. This helps identifying whether a change may be related to a > defect for example. > > By the way, I just grepped through the documentation, and there are > quite some situations where this same change would happen, so if we care > enough, all those instances could be changed. I don't know if we care > enough though. That's for others, like Randy, to decide. I think that we don't care enough. The referenced web page talks about formal documentation. We aren't quite formal IMO. -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
