From owner-svn-doc-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 30 20:52:17 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-doc-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [69.147.83.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9F4106564A; Wed, 30 May 2012 20:52:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E3814E3E3; Wed, 30 May 2012 20:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FC6887E.6070903@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:52:14 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Isabell Long References: <201205271335.q4RDZgtk051773@svn.freebsd.org> <4FC29C2B.70405@FreeBSD.org> <1338382465.65409.63.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <20120530154513.GA1796@sky.issyl0.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20120530154513.GA1796@sky.issyl0.co.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-doc-head@FreeBSD.org" , "svn-doc-all@FreeBSD.org" , Gavin Atkinson , "doc-committers@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: svn commit: r38908 - head/share/sgml X-BeenThere: svn-doc-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire doc trees \(except for " user" , " projects" , and " translations" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 20:52:17 -0000 On 5/30/2012 8:45 AM, Isabell Long wrote: > On 30 May 2012, at 13:54, Gavin Atkinson wrote: >> On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 14:27 -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>> On 05/27/2012 06:35, Gavin Atkinson wrote: >>>> + The Bangladeshi FreeBSD User Group is a group of the FreeBSD >>> >>> Would &os; be appropriate here as well? >> >> Now I've already made the commit though, I'm not sure it is worth >> touching that line again (especially when the rest of the file uses >> almost none of our entities). > > Why not completely fix it? Surely there's no point leaving the whole > file imperfect and having the same discussion in six months time when > others notice? > > (I realise that I may have just volunteered myself for the task...) Since Isabell already volunteered I feel safe in saying that my preference is towards repo-churn that leads to a more complete solution as well. :) Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection