Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-30 Thread Michael Gerz
Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb: Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Bo Peng schrieb: | On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hi, | | we use the term Listing inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use | the singular form, sometimes we use plural. | | I suggest using

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-30 Thread Michael Gerz
Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb: Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Bo Peng schrieb: | > On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | >> Hi, | >> | >> we use the term "Listing" inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use | >> the singular form, sometimes we use plural. | >> | >>

Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Michael Gerz
Hi, we use the term Listing inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using Listing (without plural s), even though the package is called Listings. Otherwise, we may confuse the users and translators. If you agree, I will prepare a

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Bo Peng
On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, we use the term Listing inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using Listing (without plural s), even though the package is called Listings. Otherwise, we may confuse the users

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Michael Gerz
Bo Peng schrieb: On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, we use the term Listing inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using Listing (without plural s), even though the package is called Listings. Otherwise, we may

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread José Matos
On Tuesday 29 May 2007 21:47:09 Michael Gerz wrote: How about the following patch? OK to commit? OK. Michael -- José Abílio

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Bo Peng
Well, there are many cases where we use the plural form. You are right. Thanks. How about the following patch? OK to commit? +1. Bo

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Bo Peng schrieb: | On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hi, | | we use the term Listing inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use | the singular form, sometimes we use plural. | | I suggest using Listing (without plural s), even

Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Michael Gerz
Hi, we use the term "Listing" inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using "Listing" (without plural "s"), even though the package is called "Listings". Otherwise, we may confuse the users and translators. If you agree, I will

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Bo Peng
On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, we use the term "Listing" inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using "Listing" (without plural "s"), even though the package is called "Listings". Otherwise, we may confuse

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Michael Gerz
Bo Peng schrieb: On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, we use the term "Listing" inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use the singular form, sometimes we use plural. I suggest using "Listing" (without plural "s"), even though the package is called "Listings".

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread José Matos
On Tuesday 29 May 2007 21:47:09 Michael Gerz wrote: > How about the following patch? OK to commit? OK. > Michael -- José Abílio

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Bo Peng
Well, there are many cases where we use the plural form. You are right. Thanks. How about the following patch? OK to commit? +1. Bo

Re: Listing vs. Listings

2007-05-29 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Bo Peng schrieb: | > On 5/29/07, Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | >> Hi, | >> | >> we use the term "Listing" inconsistently at the moment. Sometimes we use | >> the singular form, sometimes we use plural. | >> | >> I suggest using "Listing"