Fixed some typos and formatting issues #3642
Conversation
| Q | A |
|---|---|
| Doc fix? | yes |
| New docs? | no |
| Applies to | 2.3+ |
| Fixed tickets | no |
| your application could operate without clashing. For example, `module1.foo` and | ||
| `module2.foo`. However, sometimes this is not very practical when the attributes | ||
| your application could operate without clashing. For example, ``module1.foo`` and | ||
| ``module2.foo``. However, sometimes this is not very practical when the attributes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
remove very? it is not practical is more fit -> fit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@cordoval I don't understand your proposal. This is the original phrase:
However, sometimes this is not very practical when the attributes [...]
What would you replace it for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just commenting that sometimes the word already has the meaning, so usually we say very practical when practical is enough as an adjective. It is a nuance when there is nothing to compare it with. That is why I added my inline example more fit when what i meant was just fit. Maybe it is ok, just raising up a point of discussion. Sorry maybe it is just me. 👶
|
Awesome again - thanks Javier! Btw, if things apply to 2.3, you can create a PR against the 2.3 branch. I'm patching these into 2.3 anyways, but if the PR is against 2.3, it'll prevent any expected conflicts when I merge to a differnt branch :). Cheers! |
This PR was submitted for the master branch but it was merged into the 2.3 branch instead (closes #3642). Discussion ---------- Fixed some typos and formatting issues | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Doc fix? | yes | New docs? | no | Applies to | 2.3+ | Fixed tickets | no Commits ------- ce6fc73 Minor corrections 9a3b12f Fixed some typos and formatting issues
|
any *unexpected conflicts 😉 |