From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH SECURITY-POLICY 3/9] Deployment with
 Security Team Permission
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 15:55:38 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFLBxZb085bQDgjDanWs7tPZ8rpHXbL7ZTZnOy-njJLZVgAFNg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <21689.27383.339939.319567@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
	<1421437941-10997-1-git-send-email-ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
	<1421437941-10997-3-git-send-email-ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
	<54BCE88302000078000564EE@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<9B322CF6-E14F-4C99-A66E-78A542FB90C2@gmail.com>
	<21693.2255.357567.583370@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <dunlapg@gmail.com>) id 1YDEg1-0001a0-Mg
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 15:55:41 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id uz6so13939991obc.11
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2015 07:55:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <21693.2255.357567.583370@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Ian Jackson
<ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH SECURITY-POLICY 3/9] Deployment with Security Team Permission"):
>> On 19 Jan 2015, at 10:20, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>> > On 16.01.15 at 20:52, <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> >> +<p>List members may, if (and only if) the Security Team grants
>> >> +permission, deploy fixed versions during the embargo.  Permission for
>>
>> Better: List members may deploy fixed versions during the embargo, if (...)
>
> The reason I didn't write it like that is that someone who reads only
> the first part of the sentence might not see the caveat.
>
> Is my wording unclear ?

I think it's just a less common grammatical construct (splitting "may
do X" into "may, if Y, do X"), and so perhaps a bit more difficult for
non-native speakers to parse?  But I think that probably in this case,
while it might take a bit more effort to read for some, the risk of
someone actually misunderstanding your wording is low; while the risk
of someone missing the caveat in the other wording is much more
dangerous.  So I'd leave it the way it is.

 -George