Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> But “your branch is up-to-date” is INCORRECT. And, because it’s >> incorrect, it conveys an odd and unsettling experience to native >> English speakers whenever they read it. >> >> If you’re curious, you can find plenty of discussion of this point of >> grammar. Here’s just one example: >> https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/180611/do-i-keep-myself-up-to-date-or-up-to-date-on-something. > > There is also some previous discussion on this very list: > https://public-inbox.org/git/CALFtnmeRxgetuCVbO8ZmVkCR302vQ2s4hTPoHxAe5NEfmjtXEg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > The code base contains a few instances of "up-to-date" and "up to date". > A tree wide sweep could be made to update user-visible strings in the > code and in the documentation. Fixing source code comments seems like > overkill. It should be safe to update any message that is meant for human consumption (i.e. those inside the _("... message ...")) i18n marker). As the use of "up-to-date" dates back to the days when Linus was still doing much code for our project, I suspect there may be some plumbing message that contains the phrase that scripts expect to stay spelled that way, and it is not OK to "fix" them. Thanks.
