Re: [Patch] Typo corrections
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:29:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:20:10AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > the attached patch fixes a lot of typos such as s/can not/cannot/,
> > s/seperate/separate/ in documentation and partly in code comments.
> "can not" is not a typo, it is valid English.
Indeed. But in more than 95% of usage (and everywhere in the patch) it
is just wrong. Let me refer to
> > Since it's only a trivial fix I suggest to apply it in Sarge trunk as well
> > if possible.
> Particularly because many of these changes are trivial release-wise
> (imposing a questionable style guide on others' changelog entries?
I always prefer when people correct my own errors, many other think
similar. I know that changing a changelog entry is controversial but the
last postings on debian-devel demonstrate that it happens.
> spell-checking scripts but not documenting the change in debian/changelog?
No need to document such trivial stuff. Everyone can look into SVN
> changing "can not" to "cannot", but ignoring comma-splice grammar errors on
I haven't seen this. I have problems with German comma usage and
all I know about English comma usage is that it is different from German
> the same line? English spell-checking of other language manuals?), I don't
When I find an error I correct it, is this wrong?
You refer to
--- packages/po/et.po (Revision 26549)
+++ packages/po/et.po (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -1540,7 +1540,7 @@
"Please enter the directory in which the mirror of the Debian archive is "
-msgstr "Palun sisesta kataloog, kus Debaini arhiivi peegeldus asub."
+msgstr "Palun sisesta kataloog, kus Debiani arhiivi peegeldus asub."
#. Type: string
right? I checked that Debiani is valid and Debaini isn't. Changes to
other translations are restricted to English words to simplify a sync with
English files (is it wrong to try to reduce work for translators?)
> think this patch should be committed to the sarge branch in its entirety.
OK. I mainly referred to documentation not to errors in scripts.
> The documentation fixes are appropriate to commit to the sarge branch, of
> course, but hand-edits to auto-generated files like an autoconf configure
> script, OTOH, are not appropriate on any branch...
There is not always the time to analyse each bit of code. You're right
that fixing auto-generated files is not perfect but it doesn't harm.
Normally I find and correct these kind of typos using "grep -ri errroor ."
for a whole set of directories (website, DDP, manpages, ...) and this is
generally very useful since the same errors are made again and again.
A few months ago I fixed errors related to indefinite articles a/an and
fixed it more than one hundred times alone in the website! Similar common
typos are "seperated", "can not", and of course mising, doubbled or
sawpped characters, doubled words words, ... Searching for these at once
is (at my opinion) very efficient.