From d4576e3c081a7ee7b57d48421c4c4f491cb4defe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Robert P. J. Day" Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 08:23:09 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] contributor-guide: fix type "maintainance" to "maintenance" Correct "maintainance" typo in recipe-style-guide.rst. (From yocto-docs rev: f39ba5141cd518f08d491b2255a4acd74442e87b) Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day Signed-off-by: Antonin Godard (cherry picked from commit d7376cca64a0784e59d4fd60b9baefb4da2ce289) Signed-off-by: Antonin Godard Signed-off-by: Paul Barker --- documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst b/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst index c3d873980c..32a5ccd293 100644 --- a/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst +++ b/documentation/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.rst @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ following status strings: No determination has been made yet, or patch has not yet been submitted to upstream. - Keep in mind that every patch submitted upstream reduces the maintainance + Keep in mind that every patch submitted upstream reduces the maintenance burden in OpenEmbedded and Yocto Project in the long run, so this patch status should only be used in exceptional cases if there are genuine obstacles to submitting a patch upstream; the reason for that should be @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ following status strings: The patch is not appropriate for upstream, include a brief reason on the same line enclosed with ``[]``. In the past, there were several different reasons not to submit patches upstream, but we have to consider that every - non-upstreamed patch means a maintainance burden for recipe maintainers. + non-upstreamed patch means a maintenance burden for recipe maintainers. Currently, the only reasons to mark patches as inappropriate for upstream submission are: