Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-139345-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@leemhuis.info>, Karel Balej <balejk@matfyz.cz>,
 regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs: *-regressions.rst: unify quoting, add missing
 word
In-Reply-To: <3e53f18c-12aa-4bf8-b3f7-7945bbca6882@leemhuis.info>
References: <20240328194342.11760-1-balejk@matfyz.cz>
 <20240328194342.11760-2-balejk@matfyz.cz>
 <3e53f18c-12aa-4bf8-b3f7-7945bbca6882@leemhuis.info>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:03:29 -0600
Message-ID: <874jc9szfi.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

"Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
<regressions@leemhuis.info> writes:

> On 28.03.24 20:29, Karel Balej wrote:
>> Quoting of the '"no regressions" rule' expression differs between
>> occurrences, sometimes being presented as '"no regressions rule"'. Unify
>> the quoting using the first form which seems semantically correct or is
>> at least used dominantly, albeit marginally.
>> 
>> One of the occurrences is obviously missing the 'rule' part -- add it.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Karel Balej <balejk@matfyz.cz>
>
> Thx for this:
>
> Reviewed-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>

I've applied this patch; part 2, it seems, is subject to further work so
I have not applied that one.

Thanks,

jon