From owner-freebsd-bugs  Sun Nov  5 10: 0:47 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 93ABE37B4C5; Sun,  5 Nov 2000 10:00:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from dougb@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA12639;
	Sun, 5 Nov 2000 10:00:45 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org)
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 10:00:45 -0800 (PST)
From: <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-Id: <200011051800.KAA12639@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: knu@idaemons.org, dougb@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org,
	dougb@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: conf/22622: make.conf includes both "optimisation" and "optimization" spellings
Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Synopsis: make.conf includes both "optimisation" and "optimization" spellings

State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: dougb
State-Changed-When: Sun Nov 5 09:55:26 PST 2000
State-Changed-Why: 
Historically the jury on spelling standardization always
comes back hung. In the past we've used either of
A) author's preference
B) majority rule
C) just Americanize and to heck with objections

A) doesn't really apply here, B) would swing towards
changing the one instance of optimiZation to the s
spelling. Personally I've always felt that having one
standard is better, but I'm open to suggestions...



Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->dougb
Responsible-Changed-By: dougb
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Nov 5 09:55:26 PST 2000
Responsible-Changed-Why: 
I'll take responsibility for this

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=22622


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message