Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Merged by Bors] - chore: Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings #13877

Closed
wants to merge 22 commits into from

Conversation

Shreyas4991
Copy link
Collaborator

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 16, 2024

PR summary 7952c9c003

Import changes

No significant changes to the import graph


Declarations diff

No declarations were harmed in the making of this PR! 🐙

You can run this locally as follows
## summary with just the declaration names:
./scripts/no_lost_declarations.sh short <optional_commit>

## more verbose report:
./scripts/no_lost_declarations.sh <optional_commit>

@eric-wieser eric-wieser added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Jun 16, 2024
@Shreyas4991 Shreyas4991 changed the title Chore : Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw dosctrings Chore : Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings Jun 17, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@rwst rwst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The whole change is much welcome. As a new user I can understand the text, and Grammarl y only complains about "afterward(s)".

@Shreyas4991
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Shreyas4991 commented Jun 23, 2024

That's some Americanism by grammarly. "Afterwards" is definitely correct in English.

See : https://dictionary.cambridge.org/thesaurus/articles/afterwards

Copy link
Collaborator

@Ruben-VandeVelde Ruben-VandeVelde left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@Ruben-VandeVelde Ruben-VandeVelde added awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes and removed awaiting-review labels Jun 24, 2024
@Shreyas4991 Shreyas4991 added awaiting-review awaiting-CI and removed awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes labels Jun 24, 2024
@j-loreaux
Copy link
Collaborator

LGTM. Another maintainer can review the above unresolved conversations to see if they feel anything should be done. Make sure to wait for CI (probably doesn't matter since it's only docstrings, but still).

maintainer merge

Copy link

🚀 Pull request has been placed on the maintainer queue by j-loreaux.

@Shreyas4991
Copy link
Collaborator Author

what is a maintainer merge and given that the bot says it is already on some merge queue, I am not sure how I wait for CI.

Copy link
Contributor

@Vierkantor Vierkantor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@semorrison I'm okay either way, applying your suggestion to copy the docs or not. Do you want to make the final decision?

@Vierkantor Vierkantor changed the title Chore : Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings chore: Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings Jun 25, 2024
@j-loreaux
Copy link
Collaborator

j-loreaux commented Jun 25, 2024

@Shreyas4991 a maintainer merge is when a reviewer places a PR on a queue (really just a thread in a private channel on Zulip) for a maintainer to look at and potentially merge. Sometimes maintainers themselves use this queue so that they can get approval from another maintainer, as I have done here. You can still wait for CI as normal, but unlike delegation, a maintainer merge does not give anyone the authority to merge (other than maintainers themselves, but they already had such authority). Note: my reference to CI was for the maintainer so that they didn't think it was already fully prepared for merging.

Copy link
Collaborator

@joneugster joneugster left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I resolved the open suggestion, since I don't consider them necessary and other reviewers didn't either.

I read through the text again and it's really clear. Left some comma suggestions, but I think it should be merged with or without them

remove accidental spaces at end of line.

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Collaborator

@Ruben-VandeVelde Ruben-VandeVelde left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maintainer merge

Copy link

🚀 Pull request has been placed on the maintainer queue by Ruben-VandeVelde.

@j-loreaux
Copy link
Collaborator

bors merge

@mathlib-bors
Copy link
Contributor

mathlib-bors bot commented Jun 27, 2024

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot changed the title chore: Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings [Merged by Bors] - chore: Improved nth_rewrite and nth_rw docstrings Jun 27, 2024
@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot closed this Jun 27, 2024
@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot deleted the nth_rewrite_docs branch June 27, 2024 16:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation maintainer-merge ready-to-merge This PR has been sent to bors.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants