[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug#29708] Update s-shell
From: |
ng0 |
Subject: |
Re: [bug#29708] Update s-shell |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:38:35 +0000 |
Ludovic Courtès transcribed 0.4K bytes:
> ng0 <address@hidden> skribis:
>
> > From cf2cbe9e9e525aa9dd697fcedb255a0fbc194ac9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: ng0 <address@hidden>
> > Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 13:22:58 +0000
> > Subject: [PATCH] s-shell: Update to commit
> > da2e5c20c0c5f477ec3426dc2584889a789b1659.
> >
> > * gnu/packages/shells.scm (s-shell): Update to commit
> > da2e5c20c0c5f477ec3426dc2584889a789b1659.
> > (version): Use 'git-version'.
>
> I adjusted the commit log and pushed.
Why is it [version]? Shouldn't it be (version)?
Even though [version] now makes sense, I've seen
mostly [] when it followed a () - and that's why
I've been using ()[] and never(?) [] on its own.
I haven't read HACKING or the chapter 'Contributing' in a while,
so you might be describing something that's already in there. If
it isn't, does it matter to agree on a fixed grammar for this?
I've come to appreciate the strong QA and checks, but what matters
is the content of the brackets, not the chosen form of brackets.
For ()[] it makes sense.
> Thanks!
>
> Ludo’.
>
--
GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588
GnuPG: https://c.n0.is/ng0_pubkeys/tree/keys
WWW: https://n0.is
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [bug#29708] Update s-shell,
ng0 <=