Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Consistently use read-only instead of "read only"

  1. Read-only vs read only vs readonly

    Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2021-09-02T18:20:36Z

    I had a customer point out to me that we're inconsistent in how we
spell read-only. Turns out we're not as inconsistent as I initially
thought :), but that they did manage to spot the one actual log
message we have that writes it differently than everything else -- but
that broke their grepping...

Almost everywhere we use read-only. Attached patch changes the one log
message where we didn't, as well as a few places in the docs for it. I
did not bother with things like comments in the code.

Two questions:

1. Is it worth fixing? Or just silly nitpicking?

2. What about translations? This string exists in translations --
should we just "fix" it there, without touching the translated string?
Or try to fix both? Or leave it for the translators who will get a
diff on it?

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/

  2. Re: Read-only vs read only vs readonly

    Nathan Bossart <bossartn@amazon.com> — 2021-09-02T22:07:02Z

    On 9/2/21, 11:30 AM, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> I had a customer point out to me that we're inconsistent in how we
> spell read-only. Turns out we're not as inconsistent as I initially
> thought :), but that they did manage to spot the one actual log
> message we have that writes it differently than everything else -- but
> that broke their grepping...
>
> Almost everywhere we use read-only. Attached patch changes the one log
> message where we didn't, as well as a few places in the docs for it. I
> did not bother with things like comments in the code.
> 
> Two questions:
>
> 1. Is it worth fixing? Or just silly nitpicking?

It seems entirely reasonable to me to consistently use "read-only" in
the log messages and documentation.

> 2. What about translations? This string exists in translations --
> should we just "fix" it there, without touching the translated string?
> Or try to fix both? Or leave it for the translators who will get a
> diff on it?

I don't have a strong opinion, but if I had to choose, I would say to
leave it to the translators to decide.

Nathan

  3. Re: Read-only vs read only vs readonly

    Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> — 2021-09-03T06:10:00Z

    At Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:07:02 +0000, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote in 
> On 9/2/21, 11:30 AM, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> > I had a customer point out to me that we're inconsistent in how we
> > spell read-only. Turns out we're not as inconsistent as I initially
> > thought :), but that they did manage to spot the one actual log
> > message we have that writes it differently than everything else -- but
> > that broke their grepping...
> >
> > Almost everywhere we use read-only. Attached patch changes the one log
> > message where we didn't, as well as a few places in the docs for it. I
> > did not bother with things like comments in the code.
> > 
> > Two questions:
> >
> > 1. Is it worth fixing? Or just silly nitpicking?
> 
> It seems entirely reasonable to me to consistently use "read-only" in
> the log messages and documentation.
> 
> > 2. What about translations? This string exists in translations --
> > should we just "fix" it there, without touching the translated string?
> > Or try to fix both? Or leave it for the translators who will get a
> > diff on it?
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion, but if I had to choose, I would say to
> leave it to the translators to decide.

+1 for both.  As a translator, it seems that that kind of changes are
usual.  Many changes about full-stops, spacings, capitalizing and so
happen especially at near-release season like now.

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

  4. Re: Read-only vs read only vs readonly

    Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2021-09-07T20:05:58Z

    On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 8:10 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:07:02 +0000, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote in
> > On 9/2/21, 11:30 AM, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> > > I had a customer point out to me that we're inconsistent in how we
> > > spell read-only. Turns out we're not as inconsistent as I initially
> > > thought :), but that they did manage to spot the one actual log
> > > message we have that writes it differently than everything else -- but
> > > that broke their grepping...
> > >
> > > Almost everywhere we use read-only. Attached patch changes the one log
> > > message where we didn't, as well as a few places in the docs for it. I
> > > did not bother with things like comments in the code.
> > >
> > > Two questions:
> > >
> > > 1. Is it worth fixing? Or just silly nitpicking?
> >
> > It seems entirely reasonable to me to consistently use "read-only" in
> > the log messages and documentation.
> >
> > > 2. What about translations? This string exists in translations --
> > > should we just "fix" it there, without touching the translated string?
> > > Or try to fix both? Or leave it for the translators who will get a
> > > diff on it?
> >
> > I don't have a strong opinion, but if I had to choose, I would say to
> > leave it to the translators to decide.
>
> +1 for both.  As a translator, it seems that that kind of changes are
> usual.  Many changes about full-stops, spacings, capitalizing and so
> happen especially at near-release season like now.

Thanks for the input. I've applied this and back-patched to 14 since
it's not out yet and there is translation still do be done. I didn't
backpatch it further back than that to avoid the need for translation
updates there.

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/