Grammar Edits to the Manual

Grammar Edits to the Manual

[ricaljasan]

Almost two years later, I will finally be posting my grammatical edits
to the manual.[1]  Upon reviewing my edits in order to categorize them
for my commit message, I decided it would be advantageous to all
involved if I submitted multiple patchsets based on those categories.

The main reason I'm bothering to send this cover letter is that order
may be important.  For example, the first patchset will address typos,
but not necessarily all typos found---it should be obvious that
something was _wrong_.  Sometimes, however, a typo is better corrected
by extensive rearrangement.  I consider extensive edits related to
readability, and those will come later.

It may also happen that a reviewer notices other problems surrounding an
edit, either in the context or on the same line---hopefully those will
be addressed by subsequent patchsets or aren't related to grammar.

I have tried to minimize such overlap by adopting as conservative an
approach as possible to "wrong" grammar, but I'll be damned if language
isn't a matter of taste.  Above all, I hope I have conserved the
authors' voices, as I found them many, and varied.

Thank you all for your consideration and the opportunity.

Rical Jasan

---
[1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-07/msg00290.html

Re: Grammar Edits to the Manual

[Adhemerval Zanella]

On 05/05/2016 05:03, ricaljasan wrote:
> Almost two years later, I will finally be posting my grammatical edits
> to the manual.[1]  Upon reviewing my edits in order to categorize them
> for my commit message, I decided it would be advantageous to all
> involved if I submitted multiple patchsets based on those categories.
> 
> The main reason I'm bothering to send this cover letter is that order
> may be important.  For example, the first patchset will address typos,
> but not necessarily all typos found---it should be obvious that
> something was _wrong_.  Sometimes, however, a typo is better corrected
> by extensive rearrangement.  I consider extensive edits related to
> readability, and those will come later.
> 
> It may also happen that a reviewer notices other problems surrounding an
> edit, either in the context or on the same line---hopefully those will
> be addressed by subsequent patchsets or aren't related to grammar.
> 
> I have tried to minimize such overlap by adopting as conservative an
> approach as possible to "wrong" grammar, but I'll be damned if language
> isn't a matter of taste.  Above all, I hope I have conserved the
> authors' voices, as I found them many, and varied.
> 
> Thank you all for your consideration and the opportunity.
> 
> Rical Jasan
> 

Thanks you for the effort and the strategy seems reasonable.  I would
advise to first work a limited number of patches first (the typos),
get them reviewed and pushed before drop patches related to wording
and style.  Typos patches are reviewed more easily and won't diverge
attention for the other patches.

> ---
> [1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-07/msg00290.html
>