[or-cvs] r15848: It seems that fixing one spelling error always means that so (in tor/trunk: . doc/spec/proposals)

[nickm@xxxxxxxx]

Author: nickm
Date: 2008-07-11 17:07:43 -0400 (Fri, 11 Jul 2008)
New Revision: 15848

Modified:
   tor/trunk/
   tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/150-exclude-exit-nodes.txt
Log:
 r16928@tombo:  nickm | 2008-07-11 17:07:36 -0400
 It seems that fixing one spelling error always means that somebody is about to tell me about another.  Fix a second spelling error in the risks section of 150.



Property changes on: tor/trunk
___________________________________________________________________
 svk:merge ticket from /tor/trunk [r16928] on 49666b30-7950-49c5-bedf-9dc8f3168102

Modified: tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/150-exclude-exit-nodes.txt
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/150-exclude-exit-nodes.txt	2008-07-11 21:05:56 UTC (rev 15847)
+++ tor/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/150-exclude-exit-nodes.txt	2008-07-11 21:07:43 UTC (rev 15848)
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
 
    Use of this option can make users partitionable under certain attack
    assumptions.  However, ExitNodes already creates this possibility,
-   so there isn't much increased risk in ExcludeExitNods.
+   so there isn't much increased risk in ExcludeExitNodes.
 
    We should still encourage people who exclude an exit node because
    of bad behavior to report it instead of just adding it to their