Excerpts from Tim Bell's message of 2013-11-11 11:28:46 -0800: > > As a speaker of the Queen's English, I find flavor to be incorrect. Does that > mean I can -1 any patch that does not use flavour ? >
PEP8 states that "English" should be used. In "English" either spelling is correct because no localization is actually specified. If we said UK English I'd add u's to flavor and color. But we do not, so the words just have alternate spellings. We should consider fixing that and being clear that we use one or the other, but as it is now, I think one should leave these spelling quirks alone. > At CERN, we are working with 130 countries in a single community. The value > of the contribution of non-english speakers far exceeds the occasional > misunderstandings. > > Giving grammar/spellings -1 excludes major sections of the community from > contribution. > I think there is a tactful and helpful way for a native english speaker to correct a non-native speaker in code review. I don't see how correcting things "excludes" the submitter. Quite the contrary, it is up front and honest, which should build trust. If only half of the native speakers -1 for spelling and grammar it will only create confusion. > As our aim is meritocracy (in python, computer architecture and design rather > than spelling), I'd propose > > - If someone identifies a need for clarification/correction as part of a > review, they also submit the replacement text rather than just -1. > - The submitter incorporates that change into a patch > Agreed that it is a good idea to be very clear and make specific corrections. This is different from more complex issues where it is more appropriate, usually, to make problem statements and let the submitter learn from that. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
