Hi, On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:01 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Hariom Verma via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > @@ -839,14 +818,7 @@ test_expect_success '%(trailers) rejects unknown trailers arguments' ' > > fatal: unknown %(trailers) argument: unsupported > > EOF > > test_must_fail git for-each-ref --format="%(trailers:unsupported)" 2>actual && > > - test_i18ncmp expect actual > > -' > > - > > -test_expect_success '%(contents:trailers) rejects unknown trailers arguments' ' > > - # error message cannot be checked under i18n > > - cat >expect <<-EOF && > > - fatal: unknown %(trailers) argument: unsupported > > - EOF > > + test_i18ncmp expect actual && > > test_must_fail git for-each-ref --format="%(contents:trailers:unsupported)" 2>actual && > > test_i18ncmp expect actual > > ' > > Doesn't this highlight a small bug, where an end-user request for an > unknown %(contents:trailers:unsupported) is flagged as an error > about %(trailers)? Is it OK because we expect that users who use > the longer %(contents:trailers) to know that it is a synonym for > %(trailers) and the latter is the official way to write it? Maybe. Another way of thinking is... 'trailers' is an argument to 'contents', likewise here 'unsupported' is an argument to trailers. Technically, the error message is correct. Again, I think views on this are highly subjective. Thanks, Hariom
