Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] merge: fix swapped "up to date" message components

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

 



On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 1:21 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > +     if (verbosity >= 0) {
> > +             if (squash)
> > +                     puts(_("Already up to date. (nothing to squash)"));
>
> The original scripted Porcelain may have said so, but the placement
> of full-stop in the above feels a bit strange.  Should we rephrase
> it to
>
>         Already up to date (nothing to squash).
>
> as we are fixing the phrasing now?

I don't have a strong opinion about it, and can go either way with it.
Josh's patch did place the full-stop after the closing parenthesis. I
can re-roll if people think that would be preferable (unless you want
to change it locally while queuing).



[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