spelling correction

Christopher Faylor cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com
Wed Oct 6 16:10:00 GMT 2004

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:45:00PM +0100, Phil Betts wrote:
>Alexander Gottwald wrote:
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> On this page:
>>> http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html
>>> there is a heading:
>>> "11.4. Whom holds the copyright on the Cygwin/X source code?"
>>> It should of course be "Who".
>>> Sorry to send such trivial feedback to this list but your index
>>> page give this address for such problems!
>The links referred to in Harold's message only serve to prove him
>wrong.  Yes, even the great can occasionally have an off day ;-)
>I only mention this because the vehemence of Harold's rebuttal is
>likely to persuade others that he is correct, and it wouldn't do to
>perpetuate the confusion.

There is a problem with being a language lawyer on the internet.

	1.  The quality pr state of being vehement; impetuous force;
	impetuosity; violence; fury; as, the vehemence.

	2.  Violent ardor; great heat; animated fervor; as, the vehemence of
	love, anger, or other passions.

	n 1: the speech act of refuting by offering a contrary contention or

	2: (law) a pleading by the defendant in reply to a plaintiff's
	surrejoinder [syn: rebutter]

I saw no vehemence in his response and it wasn't a rebuttal.  Harold was
willing to make the changes -- he just had some additional rules for so

This was, most likely, a representation of exasperation at people
expecting him to spend time with fixes for grammatical problems while
contributing nothing else of value.

I won't say that I agree or disagree with his position but he surely had
the right to choose to spend his time as he wanted and to set rules for
updating documentation.

>Picks up soapbox and walks off into the sunset...


More information about the Cygwin-xfree mailing list