Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] config: add --fixed-value option, un-implemented

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 11/23/2020 5:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>>>  	OPT_BIT('l', "list", &actions, N_("list all"), ACTION_LIST),
>>> +	OPT_BOOL(0, "fixed-value", &fixed_value, N_("use string equality when matching values")),
>> I'm not sure how to feel about this phrasing. I wonder if it would be
>> clearer to say something like 'treat 'value_regex' as a literal string
>> instead'? Hmmm.
> 
> Update the document and help text with s/value_regex/value_pattern/
> and say "use value_pattern as a fixed string, not an extended regexp",
> perhaps?

If I go about changing all documentation and error messages to say
"value_pattern" instead of "value_regex", should I also update the uses
in the *.po translation files? Or, should I leave them unmodified to
trigger manual intervention by the translators?

Thanks,
-Stolee



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux