Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] docs: regressions.rst: rules of thumb for handling regressions

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 04.01.22 16:09, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 1/4/22 06:42, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On 04.01.22 13:16, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:23 PM Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> +Try to fix regressions quickly once the culprit got identified. Fixes for most
>>>>
>>>> s/got/gets/ --- at least, that is what the gmail grammar spelling suggests :)
>>>
>>> Hmm, LanguageTool didn't complain. Not totally sure, maybe both
>>> approaches are okay. But the variant suggested by the gmail checker
>>> might be the better one.
>>
>> So we're deeply into nit territory, but "gets" would be the correct
>> tense there.  Even better, though, is to avoid using "to get" in this
>> way at all.  I'm informed that "to get" is one of the hardest verbs for
>> non-native speakers, well, to get, so I try to avoid it in my own
>> writing.  "once the culprit is identified" or "has been identified"
>> would both be good here.
> 
> Agreed. Any uses of the verb get/got are best avoided.

Ahh, good to known, thx to both of you. I guess my English teachers
tried to put that into my head like 30 years ago, but I assume the lossy
compression algorithm in there threw it away...

Went through the document and removed all get/got, was not that hard
most of the time.

Ciao, Thorsten