Re: Debian Constitution: supercede or supersede?
On Mon, Nov 10 2008, Jens Seidel wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 01:51:47PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
>> Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
>> > I wonder about the usage of supercede. Is it OK to replace it by (or with :-?)
>> > supersede?
>>
>> Amazingly, LEO is actually correct for once. Yes, strictly speaking
>> AIUI, that should be supersede.
>
> Ah, so my assumption was true :-) Good to know.
>
>> Manoj will have to rule whether it requires a vote to fix a typo.
>
> Since a similar fix by mondo occurred already in r1.15 of
> devel/constitution.wml (there happened even more typo and formatting fixes in
> the past) and since only the header of the file is affected I see no problem.
>
> Another minor issue:
> http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.1.2.en.htmlcontains:
> "Version 1.1"
> "Version 1.0"
> but
> "version 1.3"
> "current version, 1.4"
>
> (inconsistent capitalisation).
>
> Manoj?
Minor typo fixes do not need a vote (spelling corrections, case
corrections, etc), as long as the meaning is not changed. Some times
punctuation makes a difference (placing a comma can change the
meaning), but that certainly does not seem to be the case here. Please
go ahead, and thanks for the cleanup work.
manoj
--
Computers will not be perfected until they can compute how much more
than the estimate the job will cost.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: