Skip to content

Conversation

@stepnem
Copy link
Contributor

@stepnem stepnem commented Nov 1, 2024

I'm also overriding some previous edits, so perhaps some
explanation is in order:

  1. 079a323 changed some 'open-source' to 'open source',
    but not all and not consistently. Standard English uses
    dashed forms for adjectives and non-dashed forms for nouns;
    follow that rule.

  2. 079a323 changed "people's" to "peoples'", which is
    not correct here (it would imply a number of ethnic groups
    is meant, but that's not the case); restore the original.

(As an aside, personally I tend to leave the interviews
alone beyond obvious typos, as I consider the language
idiosyncrasies part of the glimpse into an interviewee's
personality.)

I'm also overriding some previous edits, so perhaps some
explanation is in order:

1. 079a323 changed some 'open-source' to 'open source',
but not all and not consistently.  Standard English uses
dashed forms for adjectives and non-dashed forms for nouns;
follow that rule.

2. 079a323 changed "people's" to "peoples'", which is
not correct here (it would imply a number of ethnic groups
is meant, but that's not the case); restore the original.

(As an aside, personally I tend to leave the interviews
alone beyond obvious typos, as I consider the language
idiosyncrasies part of the glimpse into an interviewee's
personality.)
@mjaix
Copy link
Contributor

mjaix commented Nov 1, 2024

Thanks for your fixes! They look good to me, especially the people's one.
Regarding open source, I was also not completely happy with my changes.
From a strict English point-of-view, the adjective is written with a dash,
so open-source software is an example following that rule.
With community and ecosystem, however, I am not 100% sure whether "open source"
is an adjective or if we are talking of a compound noun -
this is a detail where my German background might lead me the wrong way.

@mjaix
Copy link
Contributor

mjaix commented Nov 1, 2024

In addition to resolving the merge conflict, I deliberately added "the new" before the platform policy document link.

@mjaix mjaix merged commit e75e35b into git:master Nov 1, 2024
@chriscool
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks @stepnem and @mjaix for your work on these fixes!

Should I merge now? Or @mjaix do you want to merge this?

@chriscool
Copy link
Collaborator

@mjaix, oh it looks like you just merged it. Thanks!

@chriscool
Copy link
Collaborator

Not sure why the MR still wants to be merged though. Maybe we can just close it instead.

@chriscool
Copy link
Collaborator

It's closed now actually. Maybe it was a spurious GitHub bug?

@stepnem
Copy link
Contributor Author

stepnem commented Nov 1, 2024 via email

@stepnem stepnem deleted the rn116copyedit branch March 3, 2025 14:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants