On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 9:51 PM Josh Soref <jsoref@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > I am not sure why this is Co-au, and not the more usual "Helped-by".
>
> If you look at the thread, you'll see that the code in question was
> written by Eric [1]. The only change from it was the addition of
> `void` to the function prototype by me.
Oops, I suppose I've been doing too much Go and C++ lately and am
forgetting `void`.
I don't have a strong opinion between Co-authored-by: and Helped-by:
in this case. Here's my sign-off if you want to retain Co-authored-by:
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 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?
>
> Maybe. I'm not sure what they mean.
>
> I generally try not to do that when I initially approach a project, I
> prefer to get more comfortable w/ it and let it get more comfortable
> w/ me before I make significant change proposals.
Indeed. While it might be nice to settle upon a single punctuation
style for these messages, I don't see this as a requirement of the
patch in question. It could, of course, be re-rolled as a two-patch
series in which the second patch addresses the exclamation points, but
fixing the punctuation could also be done later as a follow-up patch
by someone (it doesn't need to be you). So, I don't see a good reason
to hold up the current patch which stands nicely on its own.
