GNU bug report logs - #23746
25.0.95; Doc fixes (grammar, typos, clarification)

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>

Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 15:55:01 UTC

Severity: minor

Found in version 25.0.95

Done: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

Message #32 received at 23746 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: stephen.berman <at> gmx.net, 23746 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, kbrown <at> cornell.edu
Subject: Re: bug#23746: 25.0.95; Doc fixes (grammar, typos, clarification)
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 07:04:58 +0300

> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 17:09:45 -0400
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>, 23746 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong on this. The original wording is
> grammatically incorrect, please defer to people with more knowledge of
> English, as I'm sure anyone would defer to you on a question regarding
> Emacs' display engine.

Actually, no one defers to me on the display engine, I'm normally
required to prove my opinions with hard evidence.

Anyway, which part(s) are grammatically incorrect, and why?  The
changes in question modified at least 3 different parts, all of them
seem to be stylistic changes.  I wonder why stylistic matters should
cause this amount of bike-shedding.
This bug report was last modified 9 years and 64 days ago.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.