Fix a minor grammatical issue in the doc

[Ecco]

No description provided.

[senny]

@Ecco thank you 💛, for further documentation patches, please include [ci skip] in the commit message to prevent Travis CI from running needlessly.

[Ecco]

Thanks for merging!

By the way, the whole process of contributing to rails' doc isn't very well… documented :-) It took me a while to figure out that docrails wasn't were you were supposed to actually do stuff.

I'm really new to this, but off the top of my head, I think it could be improved by either :

• Actually giving write-access to docrails to anyone (this seemed to be the plan initially but it doesn't seem to be the case anymore). I guess this would fix the travis issue since CI could be simply disabled on that repository.
• Getting rid of docrails completely. (Maybe people currently trusted with push access to docrails could be given access to rails?)
• Linking to an up-to-date documentation (http://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.html#contributing-to-the-rails-documentation) in the description of the docrails repo (since the blogpost that is linked seems a bit outdated)

It could also be a good idea to mention the [ci skip] thing in the contributing guide, let me know if you'd want a pull request for this :)

[senny]

@Ecco great to hear your thoughts.

There is a NOTE: section in the contribution guide about the [ci skip]:

Write-permissions to docrails used to be public but because of changes at GitHub, this is no longer possible. We still give anyone access to docrails who is interested in contributing documentation patches regularly. That's also the reason why we'd rather not give these permissions directly on the rails/rails repository. The patches from docrails are still reviewed when we bring them into rails/rails.

If you have improvements to make it easier for new contributors please, a pull request is very welcome!

[fxn]

Some history here http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2013/6/14/docrails-back-to-the-roots/.

[Ecco]

Thanks guys, this is really insightful.

I guess the documentation is allright, I just read it too fast.

There is still something confusing though: the description of rails/docrails on GitHub.

It currently reads : "Rails branch for quick doc fixes, please DO NOT OPEN PULL REQUESTS IN HERE
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2013/6/14/docrails-back-to-the-roots/"

I believe this could be improved by:

• Changing the description (Which is straight up misleading: the patch I just contributed was clearly a "quick doc fix" but wasn't supposed to be in docrails)
• Adding all three URLs, in that order :
  http://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.html#contributing-to-the-rails-documentation then
  http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2013/6/14/docrails-back-to-the-roots/ then
  http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2012/3/7/what-is-docrails/

Also, thanks @fxn for the link. I would have sworn that docrails pointed to http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2012/3/7/what-is-docrails/
just a few hours ago :)