"obvious" requirements

[Kelley Cook]

Matt Kraii wrote:
>OK to commit the following?
...
>  
>  <p>Also note that fixes for obvious typos in ChangeLog files, docs,
>  web pages, comments and similar stuff need not be approved.  Just
>! check in the fix.  We don't want to get overly anal about checkin
>! policies.</p>
>  
>  <p>When you have checked in a patch exactly as it has been approved,
>  you do not need to tell that to people -- including the approver.
>--- 135,142 ----
>  
>  <p>Also note that fixes for obvious typos in ChangeLog files, docs,
>  web pages, comments and similar stuff need not be approved.  Just
>! check in the fix and copy it to <code>gcc-patches</code>.  We don't
>! want to get overly anal about checkin policies.</p>
>  
>  <p>When you have checked in a patch exactly as it has been approved,
>  you do not need to tell that to people -- including the approver.

Maybe, I'm just being anal, but as long as your touching this section
might it be prudent to change the vulgarity "anal" to the less tacky 
"picky"?

Kelley Cook