docs/86028: [patch] Add Ruby to the list of interpreters available with FreeBSD

[Josh Paetzel]

The following reply was made to PR docs/86028; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Josh Paetzel <josh at tcbug.org>
To: "Gary W. Swearingen" <garys at opusnet.com>
Cc: David Adam <zanchey at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>,
 freebsd-doc at freebsd.org,
 FreeBSD gnats submit <FreeBSD-gnats-submit at freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: docs/86028: [patch] Add Ruby to the list of interpreters available with FreeBSD
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 13:14:48 -0500

 On Tuesday 13 September 2005 14:02, Gary W. Swearingen wrote:
 > Josh Paetzel <josh at tcbug.org> writes:
 > > On Monday 12 September 2005 23:50, David Adam wrote:
 > >>  Perhaps this would look better as 'easy-to-understand syntax'.
 > >> (Well, I think it would.)
 > >
 > > Either way looks good to me...Is there a 'precedent' in other
 > > docs that this could conform to?
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/linux-comparison/article.sgml:
 >     easy-to-use GUI installer for FreeBSD aimed at the desktop
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/boot/chapter.sgml:
 >     configuration, using an easy-to-use built-in command set,
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/introduction/chapter.sgml:
 >     <emphasis>easy-to-port</emphasis> applications are available
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x11/chapter.sgml:
 >     <para>A simple, easy-to-handle desktop</para>
 >
 >
 > And many more in "less-easy" adjective phrases:
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/share/sgml/glossary/freebsd-glossary.sgml:
 >     <glossterm>Point-to-Point Protocol</glossterm>
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/portbuild/article.sgml:
 >     build.  This will ensure an apples-to-apples comparison
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/console-server/article.sgml:
 >     keeping up-to-date config files
 >
 > /usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/contributing/article.sgml:
 >     do much of the day-to-day work on FreeBSD.  Note that this
 >
 >
 > But as much as I like hyphens, I must admit that they're not really
 > needed in such a common phrase as "easy-to-something
 > somethingelse".
 
 I didn't expect you to look that stuffs up....I'm impressed. :)
 
 At any rate this can be committed then, right?
 
 -- 
 Thanks,
 
 Josh Paetzel