From f7845a60dfbeeb311efba1d0dc326788bfa3a126 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Peter=20L=C3=BCnenschlo=C3=9F?= <peter.luenenschloss@ufz.de>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 11:52:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Update CONTRIBUTING.md

---
 CONTRIBUTING.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md
index e3dbbb582..8efb65ae2 100644
--- a/CONTRIBUTING.md
+++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Third, underscores give a nice implicit feedback, on whether one is doing wrong
 To have no underscore, is just fine. Having one underscore, is ok, if the encoded information appended through the underscore is *really necessary* (see above). 
 If one uses two or more underscores, one should think of a better naming or omit some information. 
 Sure, although it is seldom, it might sometimes be necessary to use two underscores, but still the usage of two underscores is considered bad style.
-Using three or more underscores is not allowed unless having issued a exhaustive and accepted (by at least one core developer) reasoning.
+Using three or more underscores is not allowed unless having issued a exhaustive and accepted (by at least one core developer per underscore) reasoning.
 
 
 In short, the naming should *give a very, very rough idea* of the purpose of the argument, 
-- 
GitLab