Values and Principles - Principle 6 - awkward language

I agree that the word "also" makes the sentence awkward.

+1 as non native speaking it's easier to read.

Tagging this for DrupalCamp NYC as this is a good documentation issue example for the first time contrib workshop

Hello, I have made the needed change. Please review in the patch. I have tried the merge request but I have no authorization to push. Also, it did not showed any commands to create the branch so I had to create it manually. Looking forward to have your thoughts on it.

Cheers,
Gabriel

Hi @gabrielda,

Checked and confirmed that "also" is already removed in your patch.

Thank you.

More than awkward, it's a word that can be removed without changing much the sentence meaning. With two sentences about the same subject, also can be removed as it's clear that both the sentences are true, and they aren't in contrast with each other.

I would also replace Leadership is also not dependent with Leadership doesn't depend.

Hello, I have made the above necessary changes. Please review the patch I created.

Thanks,
Swati

To me, the patch is good to go.

Can we use 'independent' rather than using 'doesn't depend' ?!

Because it's giving direct meaning.

Added the patch and interdiff.

-<p>Leadership is also not dependent on having the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills. Instead, great leaders care deeply about others and understand the importance of putting the project first.</p>
+<p>Leadership is independent of having the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills. Instead, great leaders care deeply about others and understand the importance of putting the project first.</p>

It's is independent from.

Added the patch and interdiff.

The original report wasn't about the used verb, but (in my opinion) neither leadership is not dependent nor leadership is independent is a phrase I would use. Instead, I would use this sentence.

Leadership doesn't require to have the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills.

Added the patch and interdiff.

Hi @Shashwat Purav,

Checked and confirmed,

-<p>Leadership is also not dependent on having the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills. Instead, great leaders care deeply about others and understand the importance of putting the project first.</p>
+<p>Leadership doesn't require to have the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills. Instead, great leaders care deeply about others and understand the importance of putting the project first.</p>

Good to go.

Thank you.

I've rebased.

The suggested changes does not read well with me and one on-line grammer checked changed it. Since the other two sentences are about leadership are positive statements, I think this one should also be positive.

I have restored the change from #14, Leadership is independent of having the greatest knowledge of software or technical skills.. There was a comment that 'of' is not correct and that 'from' should be used. The information in the following links support 'of'

• https://grammarhow.com/independent-from-or-independent-of/
• https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/39349/independent-independen...
• https://lingohelp.me/preposition-after-adjective/independent-of-from-in-...

Even with "from" the sentence is still very awkward with the auxiliary gerund and so forth. It's still hard to understand. I think this is an over-application of "make a positive statement". #17 was clearer, except I would simply eliminate the words "to have" from the sentence in that proposal, and make it parallel:

Leadership doesn't require the best software knowledge or technical skills.

Edit: I also changed it to "best" since "not the greatest" is an idiomatic way of saying "bad" politely.

Edit 2: Or trying to align with what @quietone wants, how about:

Leadership is independent of software knowledge and technical skills.

Any time we can use fewer words to say the same thing, that's better docs.

FWIW I have issues with the whole paragraph also. Like "great leaders" sounds kind of... Elitist? Fascist?

Also the bit about "putting the project first" is unhealthy, compelling people to put the project above their own needs, and also has a whiff of the privilege-unaware assumption that people are even able to prioritize the project. People should always put their own health and needs first, and we should respect that maintainers have other commitments in their lives and are human beings with needs.

If we're going to keep this sort of as-is, I would use my updated proposal and file a followup to fix the second sentence.

Scope is no longer novice due to grammaria and maintainers not having consensus, so untagging.

Also the MR doesn't actually seem cleanly rebased on main? Or GitLab's UI and the lack of an MR button on-issue here is again causing me confusion. I was going to say my usual thing to the novices about not mixing patches and MRs, but in this case there's a barrier to use an MR since the UI has no button to open an MR for the fork and the GL UI is several non-obvious steps.

For the second sentence.

I followed the instructions on d.o for rebasing and it completed wrecked the existing branch. So I created a new one. That was weird too because the options to create the branch from does not include 'main' and the 'master' is behind 'main'.

There is a new MR with the suggested language from #24.

@quietone It seems drupal.org does not correctly handle a main branch, yet. (That is probably the reason why Drupal core does not have a main branch.)

Should not the issue summary be updated? Title and issue summary still describe as "awkward" having also in a sentence, while the done change is different.

Updated IS per #30.

I agree this is an improvement, the sentence is awkward. I also updated the IS.

Rebased and merged. Thanks everyone!