rn-133: change command mentions to man page references#839
Open
LemmingAvalanche wants to merge 2 commits intogit:masterfrom
Open
rn-133: change command mentions to man page references#839LemmingAvalanche wants to merge 2 commits intogit:masterfrom
LemmingAvalanche wants to merge 2 commits intogit:masterfrom
Conversation
We don’t need to use verbatim markup for commands; we can use man page (section 1) references instead. And those that are referenced in such a way already don’t need this markup. Only change the style in “Discussions” in order to not infringe on the style chosen for the “Developer Spotlight” section. Also don’t change anything that is inside quotations (quote block/inline).
Contributor
Author
|
The commit message is written in the usual imperative (which is assertive-sounding) style. But I am not asserting that this is an objective improvement. What do you all think? :) |
LemmingAvalanche
changed the title
chriscool
reviewed
Mar 31, 2026
| When Debian packagers later applied the patch using patch(1), the diff | ||
| in the commit message was applied as actual code, sneaking a spurious | ||
| `sleep(1)` call into the Debian unstable package. Matthias asked the | ||
| sleep(1) call into the Debian unstable package. Matthias asked the |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think in this case the code was exactly sleep(1) to sleep for 1 second. So contrary to patch(1) and the other places not related to sleep(), I think keeping the back-ticks is correct for sleep(1).
chriscool
reviewed
Mar 31, 2026
| Matthias pushed back: the whole point was that nobody realized the | ||
| behavior was there. He called it "sheer luck" that it was only a | ||
| `sleep(1)` and not something more malicious crafted as a diff in the | ||
| sleep(1) and not something more malicious crafted as a diff in the |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Back-ticks seems correct to me for sleep() here too.
Collaborator
|
@LemmingAvalanche the commit message is fine. I also like both commits, except for the case of Thanks! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We don’t need to use verbatim markup for commands; we can use man
page (section 1) references instead. And those that are referenced
in such a way already don’t need this markup.
Only change the style in “Discussions” in order to not infringe on the
style chosen for the “Developer Spotlight” section.
Also don’t change anything that is inside quotations (quote block/inline).