[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OT: ChangeLog stylistics
From: |
Stepan Kasal |
Subject: |
Re: OT: ChangeLog stylistics |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:12:36 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
Hello,
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 06:02:37PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stepan Kasal wrote on Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 06:13:50PM CET:
> > I though it's a problem of present vs. past tense, not active/passive voice.
> >
> > The changelog informs about what _was done_ so there is no reason to use
> > present tense or imperative.
>
> I must confess to not have been sure whether it was present vs past, or
> active vs passive.
interestingly enough, Alexandre witnesses that Akim said we shall use
imperatives.
> Anyway, personally I don't care much, [...]
Neither do I. When I don't think about it, I tend to use impperative, which
corresponds with Alexandre's requirement.
> FWIW, info standards "Simple Changes" contains:
> | * keyboard.c (Fcommand_execute): New arg SPECIAL.
> | All callers changed.
Well, this phrase seems to be an exception: I tend to use it, not "change
all callers".
Stepan