Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But I doubt the value of pointing out exact commit in the first
> place, which leads me to say that "no -m option was given but
> history has a merge" might be a viable alternative.
>
> If identifying the exact commit has value, on the other hand, we can
> rephrase it like this:
>
It has value since you see the hash and can check if you have
passed a wrong commit accidently.
I don't see why you suggest to rephrase the messages over an
abbreviation of the hash. Is it because I wrote "in the middle of"?
I think it's a good change anyway.
> error(_("no -m option was given to pick a merge '%s'", ...));
>
> to place it not in the middle. We can do similar rephrasing for
> other messages as well.
>
>>> - return error(_("Commit %s does not have parent %d"),
>>> - sha1_to_hex(commit->object.sha1), opts->mainline);
>
> error(_("No parent %d for commit '%s'", opts->mainline, ...);
>
>>> - return error(_("Mainline was specified but commit %s is not a merge."),
>>> - sha1_to_hex(commit->object.sha1));
>
> error(_("-m option was given for non-merge commit '%s'", ...);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html