From 1ac7581c6b7d343d2ee22e6c562871c0465d9735 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Livnat Peer <lpeer@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 16:25:57 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] fix spelling mistakes

Change-Id: If063f111fa42a6644a1dadc7f0c0b9bbfb359294
---
 doc/source/devref/callbacks.rst | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/source/devref/callbacks.rst b/doc/source/devref/callbacks.rst
index baaa98a83b7..4c6e6e71f24 100644
--- a/doc/source/devref/callbacks.rst
+++ b/doc/source/devref/callbacks.rst
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ do whatever they are supposed to do. In a callback-less world this would work li
   C->my_random_very_difficult_to_remember_method_about_router_created()
 
 If B and/or C change, things become sour. In a callback-based world, things become a lot
-more uniform and straightward:
+more uniform and straightforward:
 
 ::
 
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ Is the registry thread-safe?
 
   Short answer is no: it is not safe to make mutations while callbacks are being called (more
   details as to why can be found `here <https://hg.python.org/releasing/2.7.9/file/753a8f457ddc/Objects/dictobject.c#l937>`_).
-  A mutation could happen if a 'subscribe'/'unsuscribe' operation interleaves with the execution
+  A mutation could happen if a 'subscribe'/'unsubscribe' operation interleaves with the execution
   of the notify loop. Albeit there is a possibility that things may end up in a bad state, the
   registry works correctly under the assumption that subscriptions happen at the very beginning
   of the life of the process and that the unsubscriptions (if any) take place at the very end.