Comment on Git 2.42

• Illecors@lemmy.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I’m upset about it because it lacks attention to detail. Language is tricky, but this is an attempt to use an expression without understanding what it is. The obvious choice would’ve been to not use it and state the numbers plainly.

  source

  • Tamo@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Perhaps the numbers are not plainly available as the previous commenter stated, and they wanted to call out the direct contribution of the 78 unique commit authors, without disregarding many other indirect contributions from commenters, reviewers, testers etc.

    source
  • Marzepansion@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s perhaps better that patch notes are written by programmers and not linguists. Incorrectly using a (harmless) phrase is perfectly okay. It doesn’t detract from the important bits of the announcement at all.

    source
  • severien@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The obvious choice would’ve been to not use it and state the numbers plainly.

    How would you write it?

    source

    • Illecors@lemmy.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The open source Git project just released Git 2.42 with features and bug fixes from 78 contributors, 17 of them new.

      There. Simple.

      source

      • severien@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        But there were more contributors, you just don’t know how many. By this you’re kind of disregard their work.

        source

        • -> View More Comments