7ba962276e doc: Minor grammatical changes and flow improvements (Travin Keith)
Pull request description:
**Grammar:**
Line 49: There shouldn't be a period at the end of a phrase.
Lines 56, 57, 116, 137, and 177: Adding necessary commas
Lines 103 and 136: Run-on sentence issues fixed.
Line 176: Fixed punctuation and added necessary conjunction
Line 178: Singular noun when it should be plural
**Flow:**
Line 49: Adding "for" makes it more natural.
Line 54: Though it's not grammatically incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition in an informal document such as this, the word "followed" is much easier to understand anyway, especially for those who don't have English as their native language.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 17fdb5fc6146e025f160e860dbcbdbfa07b7608b8cb611c3b9d4ed91c426100ef772915251bc1f6bacb3a62df57b72c2003fb72cb2c8542454638545985313da
Grammar:
Line 49: There shouldn't be a period at the end of a phrase.
Lines 56, 57, 116, 137, and 177: Adding necessary commas
Lines 103 and 136: Run-on sentence issues fixed.
Line 176: Fixed punctuation and added necessary conjunction
Line 178: Singular noun when it should be plural
Flow:
Line 49: Adding "for" makes it more natural.
Line 54: Though it's not grammatically incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition in an informal document such as this, the word "followed" is much easier to understand anyway, especially for those who don't have English as their native language.
See laanwj's comment in #17158https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17158#issuecomment-542627090
Co-Authored-By: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@protonmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Hennadii Stepanov <32963518+hebasto@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: João Barbosa <joao.paulo.barbosa@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Michael <fanquake@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Luke Dashjr <luke-jr+git@utopios.org>
19267cbc82 doc: Add ci prefix to CONTRIBUTING.md (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
It seems our maintainers like `ci` prefix for commits and PRs:
```
git log | grep 'ci:'
```
and
So let's document it.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 19267cbc82 - this looks ok
Tree-SHA512: ef467513f9562f51d0471c5cc900336caab4e9494299bcd2c9cc9e1b296536a86467807d71b8d7100a5c78715174cf58b6ecfe6c3bd958060c15eba4fba7067f
As a first time git developer, I struggled to understand whether to create a new fork for each pull request or not.
After asking the IRC chat, I have added this to the documentation to further help new developers using git.
Co-Authored-By: Michael <fanquake@gmail.com>
It was not easy to read the comment lines for me because I was not sure whether the sentence ended with the line or not ("pull set commits"?).
Therefore, dots had been invented and I have added them to signal the end of a sentence. Also begin New sentence with a capital letter.
I guess, not all 'pick' words should be replaced by 'squash'? At least I found [https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-rebase-and-update-a-pull-request](this) rebase/squash documentation helpful, where is written that the first line should not be changed.
A numbered list is used when the sequence of steps matters. A bulleted list is used to denote a set of items where the sequence does not matter.
The workflow is a sequence and hence changed to a numbered list.
1. "If a pull request is not to be considered for merging (yet), please
prefix the ..."
2. If a particular commit references another issue, please add the reference. For
example: `refs #1234` or `fixes #4321`.
English grammar dictates that these bullet points should be capitalized.
This also makes the capitalization style consistent with the rest of the
document, e.g. the "Decision Making Process" section.
Adding in response to a Slack discussion where someone was unclear on the fact
that a NACK may be justified if code can't be accepted due to copyright/patent
issues. For example, it would be reasonable and prudent to NACK a contribution
of AGPL-licensed consensus code on the basis that the license terms are
incompatible with the MIT license used by the rest of the codebase.
