linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: Fix spelling error in remoteproc.rst

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87v7y19mmk.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2024 12:06:43 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: "Everest K.C." <everestkc@...restkc.com.np>, Mathieu Poirier
 <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
 linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: Fix spelling error in remoteproc.rst

"Everest K.C." <everestkc@...restkc.com.np> writes:

> On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 9:54 AM Mathieu Poirier
> <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning,
>>
>> This is a case of old english vs. new english.  Using "implementors" is still
>> correct.  Moreover, there are 33 instances of the word "implementor" in the
>> kernel tree.  Unless there is an effor to change all occurences I will not move
>> forward with this patch.
> I can work on changing all 33 instances of the word "implementor".
> Should I create a patchset for it ?

Honestly, given that "implementor" is correct, this really doesn't seem
like it is worth the effort and churn.

jon