Re: Fix UK spelling in comments and ChangeLog entries?

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Morning, David and everybody else!

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:25:22AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 00:05, Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> >> Are you accusing me of being inconsistent, then ;-)?

> > Well, now that you mention it...

> >> But here there is no sacrifice.  If Glenn wants to spend his time
> >> this way, why argue?

> > Fair enough. My comments are only because I think some of the authors
> > of the entries would want their linguistic flavour preserved.

> Well, those authors are presumably reading the Emacs developer list
> when they are bothered about what happens "downstream" with their
> contribution.  So they can speak up for themselves.

So I can.  British spellings, etymologically more accurate, refined and
cultured, are clearly so superior to ignorant and vulgar Americanisms,
that it vexes me that Emacs has chosen to use the latter.  I mean,
"color" is something you wear round your neck, isn't it?  And surely if
the Americans had had the moral character to retain proper spelling, they
wouldn't have brutishly, arrogantly and indiscriminately kidnapped
several hundred men, detained them unlawfully in Cuba for many years and
tortured them.  Although this is intuitively obvious, it's a little
difficult to demonstrate scientifically.  Hey, I can't help the
prejudices of my upbringing, though I try.  Sometimes. ;-)

So, yes, on balance, I would prefer British spellings to be left alone in
my Changelog entries and comments, but if Greg or anybody else wants to
"correct" them, it won't really bother me at all.  There's more pressing
things to worry about.

> There is no need to invent hypothetical people to complicate things.

Indeed not, when hypothetical people actually exist and are complicating
things quite enough as it is.

> > It is akin to making a pass and removing the lighthearted or ironic
> > comments (and there are quite a few of them).

> No, it isn't.

I think it is.

In a way, it's a bit like rigorously (no asides here, please!) enforcing
a particular way of laying out C code; lots of coding shops in the
proprietary world try (mostly half-heartedly) to do this, and most
hackers just ignore the silly rules.  Following them would wipe out
useful information about who wrote what. 

> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).