From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10F620FCF for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 18:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751914AbcF2SHT (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:07:19 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:60817 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752497AbcF2SGw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:06:52 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E88E726558; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:06:50 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=O18Hjacif3tdTePvekDhXTC9Bro=; b=sRLhOx Sq7PkMqskPk2UJDtANdetBkC7i0rgyjxqCrMDLr54MSj2PQGo35d4v4LkQOpUg/A ttSWB+tpbYJrMKN7TpCgISktvCFHLZ/xyAeeWz0Zr4+1RR1Y/GTJFITD56VzGch5 Y4+5dYlTtg9BnpLlYD41gfXWj9wCchGF5mXGs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=RFjouHRX3OX6EMJ5eB1l0dA5H6GpwPSV Q6NbTd4DGg5tiQWUTfriNgVgRVVyW6M2rUYDtPvckN9LXCFDZl1qbrSknrdkw9Vh HBXmNv1KVjXYoKOFFweakMgqY43la0/CibASHB7gYCJWcMVywVBLfoemwopZHeLQ pNRpJtDB66A= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF79826556; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:06:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6751826555; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:06:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Pranit Bauva Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3404: fix another typo References: <2ad336745e1b2a610b20b7cfba169bd3e042c178.1467210629.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:06:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 29 Jun 2016 17:31:17 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 40908DC0-3E24-11E6-B78A-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > The past tense of "to run" is "run", not "ran". >> >> Actually, past tense of the verb "to run" is "ran" ;-) The reason >> why this patch is still correct is because this is writing in >> passive voice, where you want "be + past participle", and the past >> participle of the verb "to run" is "run". > > Embarrassing! ;-) > > Well, I shall fix up the commit message thusly: > > t3404: fix another typo > > The passive form of "to run" is "run", not "ran". If your convention of referring to a verb is to show its infinitive form, i.e. "to run", then you would probably want to say The passive from of "to run" is "to be run", not "to be ran". But I think we do not need any of this if we just retitled it to Subject: t3404: fix a grammo (commands are ran -> commands are run) without any body.