[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Those ruddy punctuation fixes
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 08:11:11PM -0700, Steven Cole wrote:
> That is why I was very careful with my its -> it's patch.
> In the two files where an extra apostrophe would have broken
> the build, I changed its to it is. Why not just leave it alone?
> Because some well-meaning spelling fixer may come along in the
> future and break it, just like in proc-fns.h.

Wait, this sounds like a conversation with the Mafia:

"Pay us protection money."
"Why do we need to pay you for protection?"
"So we can protect you from criminals like ourselves."

I'd rather solve this problem by making standalone spelling fixes and
other cosmetic changes taboo. Cosmetic changes combined with actual
useful code changes are fine with me. If you're risking breaking the
build, there should be some benefit that justifies the risk.

Consider this a vote against standalone spelling/typo patches.

-VAL (normally a total pedant about spelling and grammar)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.073 / U:15.920 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site