documentation/content/en/articles/committers-guide/_index.adoc
474	Don't use "you", I know is used across the documentation, but the idea is to remove the use of it
documentation/content/en/books/handbook/ports/_index.adoc
195	`/usr/local/etc/pkg/repos` -> [.filename]#/usr/local/etc/pkg/repos#

Don't use "you", I know is used across the documentation, but the idea is to remove the use of it

@carlavilla The idea of removing doesn't look too promising. :/

❯ find . -type f -name "*.adoc" -exec grep -i -E '\syou\s' {} \+ | wc -l
   15453

Do you want me to writ a vale rule? 3:)

In D40026#911545, @bofh wrote:
Don't use "you", I know is used across the documentation, but the idea is to remove the use of it

@carlavilla The idea of removing doesn't look too promising. :/
❯ find . -type f -name "*.adoc" -exec grep -i -E '\syou\s' {} \+ | wc -l
   15453
Do you want me to writ a vale rule? 3:)

Only 15453? We will fix it in a couple of hours .)

Yes please, add a rule

Only 15453? We will fix it in a couple of hours .)

That's the spirit. :P

In D40026#911545, @bofh wrote:
Don't use "you", I know is used across the documentation, but the idea is to remove the use of it

@carlavilla The idea of removing doesn't look too promising. :/
❯ find . -type f -name "*.adoc" -exec grep -i -E '\syou\s' {} \+ | wc -l
   15453
Do you want me to writ a vale rule? 3:)

Can we discuss these vale rules on the list please?
I’m not sure that some of them lead to clearer documentation in the way that is hoped (sometimes because it is clear that authors do not know how to write sentences that comply with them, so we end up with badly written English that passes tests).

! In D40026#911558, @ceri wrote:
Can we discuss these vale rules on the list please?
I’m not sure that some of them lead to clearer documentation in the way that is hoped (sometimes because it is clear that authors do not know how to write sentences that comply with them, so we end up with badly written English that passes tests).

Feel free to fireup a discussion on the ML. Currently we do not have any grammatical rules except weasel words which I am planning to remove as it will be a too big of a task. All the rules are much more syntaxtical. Currently I believe there are hardly 3/4 doc comitters who are actually using this. :'(

In D40026#911559, @bofh wrote:

Currently we do not have any grammatical rules except weasel words which I am planning to remove as it will be a too big of a task.

Removing the weasel words rule definitely has my support.

In D40026#911571, @salvadore wrote:

In D40026#911559, @bofh wrote:

Currently we do not have any grammatical rules except weasel words which I am planning to remove as it will be a too big of a task.

Removing the weasel words rule definitely has my support.

Will take care of it after adding the Pronouns rule.

In D40026#911559, @bofh wrote:

! In D40026#911558, @ceri wrote:
Can we discuss these vale rules on the list please?
I’m not sure that some of them lead to clearer documentation in the way that is hoped (sometimes because it is clear that authors do not know how to write sentences that comply with them, so we end up with badly written English that passes tests).

Feel free to fireup a discussion on the ML. Currently we do not have any grammatical rules except weasel words which I am planning to remove as it will be a too big of a task. All the rules are much more syntaxtical. Currently I believe there are hardly 3/4 doc comitters who are actually using this. :'(

Honestly I think the onus to start the discussion is on those trying to introduce the change.

I expect the numbers of those using it is low because a) no effort has been made to announce it, b) no communication has been done as to the rationale, benefits and desired outcomes and c) no discussion has been held on the contents of the checks themselves. Some make targets may also help although I appreciate that the noise is high.

Sorry to come across as down on all this because I’m not entirely, but this is worth talking through with those that you hope to use it and you (or someone else championing it) should start that.

Guau, I'll send an email to developers@ with that...

In D40026#911582, @ceri wrote:

In D40026#911559, @bofh wrote:

! In D40026#911558, @ceri wrote:
Can we discuss these vale rules on the list please?
I’m not sure that some of them lead to clearer documentation in the way that is hoped (sometimes because it is clear that authors do not know how to write sentences that comply with them, so we end up with badly written English that passes tests).

Feel free to fireup a discussion on the ML. Currently we do not have any grammatical rules except weasel words which I am planning to remove as it will be a too big of a task. All the rules are much more syntaxtical. Currently I believe there are hardly 3/4 doc comitters who are actually using this. :'(

Honestly I think the onus to start the discussion is on those trying to introduce the change.

So far I remember I started a thread unfortunately it didn't get the traction I was expecting for. :'(

I expect the numbers of those using it is low because a) no effort has been made to announce it, b) no communication has been done as to the rationale, benefits and desired outcomes and c) no discussion has been held on the contents of the checks themselves. Some make targets may also help although I appreciate that the noise is high.

I want to add a make target while we will have low number of noise. In addition to that for the end users it's not worth running vale on the entire repo as it's cpu hungry. The best way to use it is with the editor of your choice. On another note contributors even do not do that as we can still see commits with very basic errors of EOL spacing.

grahamperrin added a comment.May 10 2023, 1:24 AM

This comment was removed by grahamperrin.

grahamperrin marked 2 inline comments as done.May 10 2023, 1:51 AM

grahamperrin added inline comments.

documentation/content/en/articles/committers-guide/_index.adoc
474	https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc/pull/182/commits/086db44d31ada0049d18277c93cd9890f0b19fa2
documentation/content/en/books/handbook/ports/_index.adoc
195	https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc/pull/182/commits/399be836a630ff85bd86729d8f30109951094c26