From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: Small fixes for typos and missing words.
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 01:10:41 +0300
Message-ID: <87vb43wra6.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <87r3esrvk8.fsf@gnu.org>
	<idjpouc86sl.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53429)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1alOK8-0003DL-0y
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:10:49 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1alOK7-0004zB-6v
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:10:47 -0400
In-Reply-To: <idjpouc86sl.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's
	message of "Wed, 30 Mar 2016 14:54:50 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: guix-devel@gnu.org

Ricardo Wurmus (2016-03-30 15:54 +0300) wrote:

> Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dear Guix,
>>
>> I noticed some typos and/or missing words when reading parts of the
>> manual.  Instead of leaving it be, I attached a patch to fix them.
>>
>> I don't know how my commit message should look like in this case, so
>> please let me know when it is wrong.
>
> I think the first fix should be this:
>
> -computations (here computations include accesses to the store.)  Values
> +computations (here computations include accesses to the store).  Values
>
> rather than having a period both in and outside the parentheses.

I agree, this looks natural to me, but I heard (from Ludo) that there is
some "typographic school" (or how is it called), that says "(foo.)" is
the correct thing.

That line originally appeared in commit b860f3824=C2=B9, and I'm afraid it =
was
intended to be written that way.

=C2=B9 http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3Db860f382447a3=
60ea2ce8a89d3357279cc652c3a

--=20
Alex