On Sat 17 Oct 2015 at 15:01:55 +0200, Mart van de Wege wrote: > Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> writes: > > > Am 17.10.2015 um 10:20 schrieb Fredrik Jonson: > >> In <qkuiv-81...@gated-at.bofh.it> Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> On Saturday 17 October 2015 06:24:10 Fredrik Jonson wrote: > >>>> Michael Biebl wrote: > >>>>> Am 16.10.2015 um 19:05 schrieb Fredrik Jonson: > >>>>>> If in doubt, do install this package. > >>>>> > >>>>> Did you maybe misread that as > >>>>> "If in doubt, do *not* install this package". > >>>> > >>>> Yes I did. I don't know how many times I've read that sentence, and > >>>> clearly > >>>> saw a _not_ in there. Interesting. > >>> > >>> The structure foreshadows a "not". > >> > >> Maybe the presence of the entire sentence indicates that the package really > >> should be installed by default on systems where systemd is installed? > >> > > > > I'm not a native speaker, so I'm happy to rephrase the message to make > > it more obvious. Suggestions? > > The use of 'do' in that way suggests emphasis. If you wanted that > emphasis, a more unambiguous way is > > If in doubt, *install* this package > > If the emphasis is unnecessary, just leave out the the 'do'.
The sentence is unambiguous (there no word "not" in it); it has a hint of instruction in it but is perfectly good English as it stands. Leaving out "do" is still good English but is more requesting or invitational.
