Re: typos

[Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>]

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 04:41, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > 
> > --- foo.orig	2004-08-17 04:27:55.000000000 -0400
> > +++ foo.fixed	2004-08-17 04:29:27.000000000 -0400
> > @@ -44,11 +44,11 @@
> >  and, I don't know how important it is to you, but I think that typos in
> >  the comments in the kernel sources really annoy those who really read
> >  them in order to understand what's going on. Well, I'm one of them, and,
> > -since the typos are really a lot, I thought that maybe fixing them would
> > +since there are really a lot of typos, I thought that maybe fixing them would
> >  be a good idea.
> > -Here's a patch. Please, tell me if you don't want such noise on the list
> > -but I think that, although not crucial, somewhat correct english in the
> > -comments would be better, or?
> > +Here's a patch. Please, tell me if you don't want such noise on the
> > +list.  I think that, although not crucial, somewhat more correct english in the
> > +comments would be better.
> >  
> >  Regards,
> >  Boris
> > 
> > 
> I was expecting a flame like that. :) However, I'm talking about typos
> and not about stylistic mistakes. After all, we don't want a masterpiece
> in contemporary english literature...
> 
> Good day to you Mr. Revell,
> 

Sorry, I couldn't resist ;-).

Seriously, submitting patches to fix typos like this is not a bad idea,
if you are inclined to do it, I am sure the patches woud be accepted.

Lee