Skip to content

Conversation

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor

This also fixes a long-standing source of confusion, dating dating back to when I first created the file. "private.num" is really "defines.num"

Removed the -p option; it's always on now.

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 27, 2019

"defines" is also not quite right, or .num for that matter. extraneous.txt, perhaps?

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Happy to change the name to anything more useful just tell me what it should be. The current name was a bad mistake on my part.

CHANGES Outdated
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

„Hundreds of improvements...“ by „[Many]“? Sounds a little bit exaggerated and vague at the same time.

I‘d suggest:

„A lot of improvements...“ by „[Rich Salz and others]“. (or „e.a.“)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If you think that others made outstanding contributions to the documentation and should be mentioned too, feel free to add them.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I made\ over 2000 changes via git diff master | grep '^+' | wc -l so I reworded it and put myself as the author. Other folks should add themselves.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, I see. I wasn't aware that the "Hundreds of improvements" were measured in line counts ;-)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

put myself as the author

You truly deserve the credits IMHO. Nobody else put so much effort into cleaning up the documentation as you did recently.

@mspncp
Copy link
Contributor

mspncp commented Sep 28, 2019

"defines" is also not quite right, or .num for that matter. extraneous.txt, perhaps?

How about „extra.sym“ or „extra.syms“?

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

"missing.num" is now called "other-names.num"

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 29, 2019

Frankly, .num is wrong.

@mspncp
Copy link
Contributor

mspncp commented Sep 29, 2019

Let's call it without.num ;-)

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 29, 2019

I'm serious in my pickiness

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@levitte I no longer care, tell me what name you want.

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 29, 2019

util/other.syms

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 29, 2019

(I do like the .syms extension. Thanks for that idea, @mspncp)

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not thrilled with the non-common ".syms" extension, but I did it.

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Sep 29, 2019

It's not like ".num" is much more common. 😉

@levitte levitte added branch: master Applies to master branch approval: review pending This pull request needs review by a committer labels Oct 1, 2019
@t8m t8m added approval: done This pull request has the required number of approvals and removed approval: review pending This pull request needs review by a committer labels Oct 2, 2019
@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

richsalz commented Oct 2, 2019

I would wait until the build-fixing PR goes in; I will have to rebase.

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

richsalz commented Oct 2, 2019

Rebased and pushed. I don't know if this needs another review or not.

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Oct 2, 2019

I don't know if this needs another review or not.

It was a clean rebase, yeah? In that case, no

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

richsalz commented Oct 2, 2019

There were merge issues in find-doc-nits, as was to be expected.

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Oct 2, 2019

In that cases, it's better to re-review

@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor Author

richsalz commented Oct 2, 2019

Should be just a reconfirm, the changes to find-doc-nits in this PR were simple.

@levitte levitte removed the approval: done This pull request has the required number of approvals label Oct 2, 2019
@levitte levitte requested a review from t8m October 2, 2019 20:59
Use err() for find-doc-nits -e output
Doing this meant we could remove the -s flag, so we do so; move
option/help stuff to top of script.
Add a CHANGES entry.
Rename missing to other.syms
@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Oct 3, 2019

Merged.

185ec4b Rename "private" file, doc doc changes in CHANGES

@levitte levitte closed this Oct 3, 2019
levitte pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2019
Use err() for find-doc-nits -e output
Doing this meant we could remove the -s flag, so we do so; move
option/help stuff to top of script.
Add a CHANGES entry.
Rename missing to other.syms

Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tmraz@fedoraproject.org>
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from #10039)
@richsalz richsalz deleted the doc-nits-changes branch October 3, 2019 13:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

branch: master Applies to master branch

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants