Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> "Josh Soref via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> From: Josh Soref <jsoref@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Usually, it is easier to read a message if it makes its primary
>> point first, before giving a parenthetical note.
>>
>> Possible messages before include:
>> ` (nothing to squash)Already up to date.
>> `
>> and
>> `Already up to date. Yeeah!
>> `
>>
>> After:
>> `Already up to date (nothing to squash).
>> `
>> and
>> `Already up to date.
>> `
>>
>> Localizations now have two easy to understand translatable strings.
>> (All localizations of the previous strings are broken.)
>>
>> Co-authored-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>
> I am not sure why this is Co-au, and not the more usual "Helped-by".
>
> The patch text makes sense to me.
Actually, not so fast. The end-users do not care really where the
message originates.
$ git grep -e 'Already up[- ]to' \*.c
maint:builtin/merge.c: finish_up_to_date(_("Already up to date."));
maint:builtin/merge.c: finish_up_to_date(_("Already up to date. Yeeah!"));
maint:merge-ort-wrappers.c: printf(_("Already up to date!"));
maint:merge-recursive.c: output(opt, 0, _("Already up to date!"));
maint:notes-merge.c: printf("Already up to date!\n");
It probably makes sense to replace the exclamation point with a full
stop for others, no?
Also, I didn't notice when reading the patch submission earlier, but
what does
>> (All localizations of the previous strings are broken.)
mean, exactly? Do you mean to say
Because this changes some messages, the old messages that were
already translated will no longer be used, and these new
messages need to be translated anew.
or
Because of (...some unstated reason...), the entries in the
message database in po/ that were meant to translate the old
messages this patch updates were not correctly used.
or something else?
