Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:06:16 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> To: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> Cc: FreeBSD-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Where did we lurn to spel? Message-ID: <8bfec353-748c-68e2-ddad-fd9a79790b97@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1604281536330.82220@wonkity.com> References: <5ac139d2-a9ed-e7bf-081b-2e841f4be22a@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1604281518580.82220@wonkity.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1604281536330.82220@wonkity.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/28/16 16:36, Warren Block wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Warren Block wrote: > >> On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> >>> Hello; >>> >>> I just updated locally the textproc/codespell to the latest version >>> (bugzilla 209128 for the curious), and it finds a *crazy* amount of >>> issues in code comments. >>> >>> I can't handle it on my own, indeed I got tired just be checking >>> sys/arm ! Anyways, here is what I went "thru": >>> >>> https://people.freebsd.org/~pfg/patches/codespell/ >> >> textproc/igor finds many mistakes, and works on text files, man pages, >> DocBook, and HTML. Use of either of these tools is optional, though. >> >> Note: in sys/arm/at91/if_atereg.h, it missed "deines"->"defines". > Yes, I haven't really reviewed them beyond the initial replacement. The changes kept growing and growing and I had to stop. > Oh, and many of these are contractions, which should be avoided anyway. Well the main questions are ... 1) Should someone brave just go ahead and commit massively such cleanups? 2) Is there a clever review process to go through these? Phabricator with documentation team, or assume common sense? 3) There are many common issues: is "thru" something we should accept in comments. How about dont vs don't ? Pedro.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8bfec353-748c-68e2-ddad-fd9a79790b97>