chore: fixed typos

[CodeWithEmad]

As decided in #474, I'll break the big clean-up PR into smaller PRs for faster review/merge.

this will introduce:

• fixing typos.
• fixing code block usage.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @CodeWithEmad! Please note that it may take us up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

Feel free to add as much of the following information to the ticket as you can:

• supporting documentation
• Open edX discussion forum threads
• timeline information ("this must be merged by XX date", and why that is)
• partner information ("this is a course on edx.org")
• any other information that can help Product understand the context for the PR

All technical communication about the code itself will be done via the GitHub pull request interface. As a reminder, our process documentation is here.

Please let us know once your PR is ready for our review and all tests are green.

[feanil]

@CodeWithEmad this has some conflicts with your other PR that I merged, can you fix it up?

[CodeWithEmad]

Sure @feanil.

[pdpinch]

Thanks so much for this @CodeWithEmad! It really improves the quality of the docs, and I appreciate the fixes to my own typos 😳.

I left a couple of comments to fix up the grammar in a few places and a couple of nits that you can take or leave.

I have one style question that I'd like a second opinion on, maybe from @feanil. The existing docs often include a shell prompt ($) in code snippets, and this PR removes them. I think it's an improvement, but we should check on what is the common practice.

[CodeWithEmad]

Thank you @pdpinch for the review. I've added all the requested changes.

The existing docs often include a shell prompt ($) in code snippets, and this PR removes them.

The code blocks have a copy button in the website. Having the $ in the beginning causes unnecessary deletion for users who want to copy and use that command.

[pdpinch]

LGTM!

I'm comfortable merging this, but I had one last question for @feanil -- do the 2 commits need to be squashed, or can I do a rebase and merge them? (There doesn't seem to be any commit linting in this repo, but I think they each pass conventional commits)

[feanil]

You can rebase merge, I only squash when it's clear there are a lot of intermediate temp commits. We turned off conventional commits on this repo to make it easier for less technical folks to make suggestions without needing to understand conventional commits.

[openedx-webhooks]

@CodeWithEmad 🎉 Your pull request was merged! Please take a moment to answer a two question survey so we can improve your experience in the future.

[pdpinch]

Thank you @CodeWithEmad!